UKPC, missed that it is no longer ignore

getmore4less

OK another here missed the changes to the just ignore advice.

Have started the read of the newbies thread but a summary to hang any quaestion off

Vehicle parked in a retail park and ticket for overstay, this was back in Oct

normal charges are 2 hours free(1 ticket pre visit) 2-3hr £2
need to check if there is a no return within displayed.

UKPC

---

Ticket on screen for overstay(no longer have this or it is in the house somewhere but can't be found)

NTK Parked after the expiry of a paid for time in a pay and display, location, date, time.

£90

(timescales for this NTK seem correct 30 days later)

Debt recover Plus (look like standard letters)

---

1. Demand £150 (14 days to pay)
2. Notice of intended court action £150 14days to pay
(date refering back to previous letter is wrong)
3. Reduced payment offer £120 (14 days to pay)

This is where we are today, 3 months down the line, expecting this to go back to the UKPC for a letter before action or do they give up?

Once I have read up I will come back if any question or proposed action.

Edit: this retail park is owned by Aviva.

Redx

tells you all you need to know in the newbies thread

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4816822

SevenTowers

getmore4less wrote: »

This is where we are today, 3 months down the line, expecting this to go back to the UKPC for a letter before action or do they give up?

Once I have read up I will come back if any question or proposed action.

You will get a further reduced offer, UKPC have never taken anybody to court, although they have recently been issuing a new letter threatening to do so, the general concensus is that it's more bluster.

You can't really do much else at this stage but continue to ignore them. The only thing not to ignore is genuine court papers, and if you get those you would be the first person ever (as a result of a UKPC fake PCN).

bod1467

I believe UKPC have been to court twice in the last year or so ... both times it was someone taking THEM to court (and winning).

4consumerrights

bod1467 wrote: »

I believe UKPC have been to court twice in the last year or so ... both times it was someone taking THEM to court (and winning).

With more heading that way ......:D

HAPPY BIRTHDAY BOD BTW:beer:


TO THE OP - The following options available.

Complain - -definintely do this to get the charge cancelled - see the successful complaints thread - Complain should be in the aggrieved and customers mode that you are shocked that a regular genuine shopper using facilites are treated in this manner.

Try the individual retailers on the retailer park or the landowner directly.You have found out it is Aviva - this will be the investors subsidiary of AVIVA PLC. They will have a management agency in place - Aviva often use Jones LeSalle so complaints to them could
be made.

The forum regulars always advocate making complaints to the landowner/retailer responsible for hiring the PPC - so it will hopefully make them realise that this is damaging to their business by upsetting customers in this way.

Regarding the debt collectors letters - this is down to how you are being affected by receiving these letters. If you are not too bothered and it is only UKPC here - then continue to ignore them.

However should you receive a letter before action from UKPC (unlikely) or a solicitor's letter from either JMW, BP Collins or LPC law then do come back for further advice as this will need responding to.

Alternatively, you could send a cease and desist letter to DRP stating

The registered keeper of the the vehicle reg no.......... denies all liability for the alleged debt for the parking charge reference .......and suggests that you refer the matter back to your client for their further consideration in this matter. Please be aware that any legal action will be vigorously defended.

The driver was invited by the landower to park in the car park as he was a genuine customer of the site and paid in full for the parking. Therefore there was no contravention to the terms and conditions of parking and no loss was incurred. The parking charge notice does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss for any alleged breach of terms. The keeper further contends that there is no contract in place with the landowner which assigns the legal rights for UKPC to pursue any alleged debt.

I therefore expect in view of the above that you refer this matter back to your client as per your legal obligations and code of practice.

You should also be aware that the keeper expects to receive written communication either from UKPC that this parking charge has been cancelled.

Any further communication from DRP with regards to further demands for payment will be deemed as harassment and reported to the relevant authorities.

I should also like to point out that any further communciation in this matter (save for receipt of confirmation of cancellation) shall be deemed as harassment. In this case, I reserve the right to claim damages for my costs and time in defending and dealing with this matter. Any reasonable costs will be claimed including (but not limited to) stationery, postage, travelling costs and my time calculated at a court rate of £18 per hour. These costs are to be claimed jointly and severally against UKPC and DRP and the landowner.

I trust that this now clarifies the matter and I look forward to receiving written confirmation by your client, UKPC that this parking charge has been cancelled.

getmore4less

Thanks guys,

Done the newbe thread and a good read of zzzLD thread should it go to a real letter before action.

It seems continue to ignore is one stratagy probably th easiest for now if they tend to give up.

The other being a letter to the PCC to try to shut it down or get them to POPLA. which may be worth the effort to stop it resurrecting some time later.

NTK seem in order unless I missed something, any links to UKPC NTK that have identified issues? ( I will have another search).


The primary defence in these cases seems to be not a pre-estimate of loss, which there would be none(plenty of spaces and its a free carpark for 2 hours) or potentialy a max of £2 to cover the time they claim we were over.(the actual wording is "Failure to comply with the Terms of parking at the specified time will result in a £90 parking charge").

along with the quote from the UKPC website referenced in one of the posts that they clearly revenue generating.
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=63823022&postcount=12

And potential lack of authority, so requesting details of the contract with the landowner(AVIVA)

Will do some more research have a bit of time to decide to wait for the next step or start a dialog

edit, thanks 4consumerrights, we x posted, will consider complaints to the owners,

Redx

the OFT thought a charge of £12 to be more like the genuine pre estimate of loss

you have failed to take into account the costs of recovery in your £2 estimate

ie:- £2.50 to dvla for your RK details, admin , postage etc, as well as the charge that may have been lost by any landowner (if any)

so maybe a tenner, but not a ton , that is why most win on no gpeol

see here for clarity https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4835943

getmore4less

I had a pop round to have a closer look at signage.

The entry signs are small and mostly unreadable from a car entering the carpark, they are also next to a MASIVE sign with the list of retailers.

on one entry there is also a pedestrian crossing so drivers should not be looking at the signs.

Most of the ticket machines do not have any signs close enough to be obvious and the relevent righting is also not readable.
need to check what is on the actual machines.

The only signs that are obvious are the two hours free with a ticket.

The overstay was just a couple of minutes(ish) so it would be usefull to find the ticket and notice to driver that was left on the car as this info is not on any of the letters(should it be?).

Do they normaly take a picture of the ticket as the only on on the letters is the rear of the car with a link to get the others(do they track access to those?).

Looks like I can add signage and grace period to any list of reasons they need to stop this harasment.

Redx

yes it does, so make sure you mention those and add pictures as proof

but also make sure the main suspect are in there too, like this example https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4816165

check the popla appeals link in the NEWBIES thread for similar winning appeals too

getmore4less

Thanks again for the previous help,

Update FYI.

Found the original PCN.
The issue time and first seen time are the same, so no leeway as required by the code of practice.
This is for an overstay(2hr free), it was not long but not sure exactly but no sign of the ticket yet.
(to access additional photos on UKPC site required to many details)

Decided to go with the ignore option at the last letter from Debt recovery+ (mid jan)

As predicted earlier another reduced offer has come through.

Debt recovery+ said they would recommend UKPC to go the solicitor in their 3rd attempt with the £120 offer(reduced from £150)

The new reduced offer of £80 is from Zenith Collections.

Will do a bit more research later to day need to go out now.

Need to decide to try and shut this down or carry on ignoring

Redx

zenith, debt recovery , they all blah blah in the same pot , ignore DR completely

if the PPC want to go to court you can fight it out then , even with the LBC letters beforehand , there is no guarantee they would win in court as they may have no contract (no locus standi , ie:- no standing) , or the charge is not a gpeol seeing as it seems no loss occurred

no DC can issue court proceedings no matter how many names they use , so either the PPC should put up or shut up