Cpm uk ltd and debt collectors..... Help!

Gem1979

Hovite wrote: »

Gem - you can just continue to ignore BUT it's obvious from your posts that you are still worried.

I'm assuming you hold a leasehold rather than a freehold on the flat ?

If so then write a letter / email to the managing agents telling them that THEY are responsible for THEIR agents ( CPM ) and unless THEY order CPM to stop harassing you that you will sue both CPM and the Managing Agents jointly. THEY are liable. If you have a residents committee table a proposal to have both CPM and the Managing agents kicked out at the next AGM and tell the Managing Agents this.

If on the other hand you own the freehold, speak to the other freeholders and persuade them to agree to kicking out both parties immediately. Then serve notice on both parties that their contracts are to be terminated after x months ( find out the cancellation period from the original contracts ).

Most of all, stop worrying - even if they did take you to court ( which they won't ) they would lose hands down.

I contacted the managing agent as it turns out the parking company are employed and paid to patrol out of my management fees. They are happy to pass on my complaint but refuse to demand that the charge be cancelled.

Folkiedave

Call/contact all the other residents and propose to end the Managing
Agent's contract ASAP. Let them know it is happening. Seek out other managing agents.

You are paying them to take money from you via this PPC? I should CoCo.

Don't give them another chance to argue theur way out if it.

esmerobbo

Gem1979 wrote: »

Hi, they won't go away!! I had another letter saying that in order to comply with pre court practise they were offering a reduced payment of £119. I ignored that as I'm pretty sure they are not obliged to offer a reduced rate and so it wasn't anything to do with compliance and I have now had another letter this time from zenith collections demanding £79.99. I don't understand why another company is now involved. Are they the same people? Surely they can't pretend to be someone else?!

DRP+ & Zenith same company look at the small print at the bottom of the letter.

Reduced offer looks like you're coming to the end!

spacey2012

What pre-court practice ? it is a criminal offence to pretend to be a solicitor.
Ask them what right of Audience they act in on behalf of this client.
They need to be a solicitor at the very least to begin any pre-court procedures or court action.

What an absolute and utter cheek.

Coupon-mad

Gem1979 wrote: »

Hi, they won't go away!! I had another letter saying that in order to comply with pre court practise they were offering a reduced payment of £119. I ignored that as I'm pretty sure they are not obliged to offer a reduced rate and so it wasn't anything to do with compliance and I have now had another letter this time from zenith collections demanding £79.99. I don't understand why another company is now involved. Are they the same people? Surely they can't pretend to be someone else?!

You can ignore the debt collector letters from DRP and Zenith:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/...3829727&page=1

Here's an idea - how about searching the forum for the word 'Zenith' then?

Gem1979

Managing agent just came back to me, the PC have emailed a photo of the car with the ticket on it. Looks like it was tucked under the wiper. Should I stand my ground still? I still don't see how I can owe them £100 for parking outside my flat whether the permit was clearly visible or not! They have admitted that the window was frosted but as you can clearly see the tax disc they are adamant that there was nothing else there. I have explained that the casual permits are designed to sit loose on the dash not fixed to the windscreen as the tax disc and permanent resident permits are and so it wouldn't be so easily seen through frost but get won't budge. As they have now proved the ticket was issued would I have less chance in court?

zzzLazyDaisy

Gemm wrote: »

The car is registered to me but I wasn't the driver at that time

A query for the regulars (apologies if it is a numpty question but I don't have time to search for the answer )

If it is a windscreen ticket, followed by a NtK (rather than the usual ANPR PCN) - if the RK then identifies the Driver, does the driver then get a PCN through the post re-setting the POPLA clock, or has the driver lost the right to appeal because s/he was (allegedly) notified of the 'offence' by the windscreen ticket? (Just wondering if there is anything to be gained by Gem identifying the Driver at this stage, since this is clearly stressing her out).

D

Umkomaas

I guess the driver has had the opportunity to read the ticket and to appeal (BUT - that suggests the ticket has the correct information on it re appeal/POPLA etc).

Another issue will be exactly what does the NtK say? If it invites the RK to name the driver, then there's the opportunity.

And over-riding all of this is whether the PPC has a full understanding of the nuances.

Whatever, if the RK wants to name the driver, and the driver can handle this better, then send off the detail - nothing much to lose at this stage, in my opinion.

zzzLazyDaisy

Gemm, as others have said, these cowboys have no history of doing court, and even if they did, the judge would laugh them out of court.

But you are pregnant and stressing about this when you should be enjoying planning for the baby. So it might just be worth a couple more letters (not because you are at any risk of being taken to court, but just to try and get the monkey off your back)... SO...

1 Your flat is leasehold, so who is the freeholder it will be on your lease, but if you don't know you can check on the landregistry.gov website for free (if you want a printout it is £3.50).

2 As you are pregnant, you have protection under the Equality Act 2010. Coupon-Mad is our EA Diva, but in her absence, I have shamelessly cannibalised one of her letters (below). Leave it up for a while for her to comment.

---

Letter to Management Company's CEO/MD


'' Dear MR NAME

OFFICIAL COMPLAINT: BREACH OF EQUALITY ACT 2010 INVOLVING INDIRECT SEX DISCRIMINATION BY CAR PARK MANAGEMENT UK, AS AGENTS FOR [NAME of MANAGEMENT AGENTS


I am forced to make an official complaint to you as [CEO/MD] of [NAME OF MANAGEMENT COMPANY] because the actions of your parking agent, Car Park Management UK ('CPM') are unlawful and your [INSERT name of person who wrote to you on behalf on management company] seems incapable of understanding that your company is jointly and severally liable for those actions.

The situation is that I am the owner of flat number[xx]. As part of my lease I am entitled to park my vehicle in the communal car park. On [date] I was parked quite lawfully in the car park, displaying my permit as required. Some time later on [date] I received a letter from CPM informing me that I had ignored a windscreen ticket, which they claimed had been placed on my windscreen. In fact I had never seen a windscreen ticket, and this letter was the first I had heard of this matter.

Following correspondence with your company [insert name of person from management agent who wrote to you] has now forwarded a copy of a photograph of my car, supposedly as 'proof' that my permit was not on display, and has refused to assist me further. However, as you can see from the photograph enclosed with this letter, the windscreen is completely frosted over and it is impossible to see inside the vehicle.

I am now being harassed by debt collectors and threats of court action - for parking quite lawfully in the car park, as an owner of a flat that YOUR company is supposed to be managing on behalf of myself and other owners.

The fact is that I am pregnant and the intense stress caused by this continued harassment by your company and its agents is affecting my health (and therefore the well being of my unborn baby). The situation has become so serious that I am now seeking advice with regard to commencing legal proceedings against CPM and your company (as being jointly and severally liable for the actions of its agent) for unlawful harassment of a pregnant woman contrary to the provisions of the Equality Act 2010.

I have been advised that, before issuing court proceedings, I should first bring this matter to your attention, and give your company the chance to quash this unfair parking charge once and for all, as you need to know that you and your agents are breaking the law by harassing me in this way, and to be given a reasonable opportunity to rectify the situation. So that is the purpose of this letter.

I require this 'parking ticket' to be cancelled of course and would be interested to hear what steps your company are going to take to review and adjust your arrangements with your parking agent, to ensure that they do not harass genuine owners in this way.

Notwithstanding what your parking agents may well have to say on the matter, no doubt involving spin about their firm 'being members of the BPA Approved Operator Scheme' (in reality, merely trade body 'club membership' which enables them to buy registered keeper data and certainly does not 'regulate' their industry) I would also respectfully suggest that your company would be well advised to pay urgent heed to the 'Equality Act Code of Practice on Services, Public Functions and Associations' which became law on 6th April 2011. This statutory guidance is available as a link on the Equality & Human Rights Commission website.

PLEASE NOTE: you are now on notice of my condition which is a 'protected characteristic' under the Equality Act. If, despite this knowledge, your agents continue to pursue me about this matter, I will be issuing county court proceedings against both parties (NAME OF MANAGEMENT COMPANY & PCM) for damages for distress and indirect sex discrimination, supported by the Maternity protection within the Equality Act 2010.

I trust that this will not be necessary and look forward to hearing from you by return with confirmation that this parking charge has now been cancelled.

yours,


PRINT NAME

Coupon-mad

Perfect, IMHO, Daisy! :T