Newbie needing help please!

Neddy139

Hi there. I'm hoping someone can help. I have read through the newbie posts and also some recent threads but am still very confused, so apologies if I am creating another thread when there is no real need. But I am just so confused and really worried that I might end up liable for a lot of money!!

I have received (yet another!!) letter from Debt Recovery Plus. This is not one I have had before. It is telling me that I have a total of 18 outstanding PCNs that date from between Sept 2013 and Feb 2014. There are more that I have received since February but these are not listed on this letter as well as tickets prior to Sept 2013 that are also not listed!

Long story short, I live in a flat where UKPC monitor the car park. I do obviously have a permit but where we have more than one vehicle in the household and only one space, often we park one car on the yellow lines in the private car park.

You need the code to get into the gate for the area where the flats are.

Shall I just continue to ignore them even though i "owe" them over £2500!! I don't want to risk them thinking it is a case worth following up!

I was contemplating writing to them to state that these tickets are in dispute and to refer them back to UKPC and then take it up with them? My arguement is

a-as far as I can tell they have no rights over the land, some of the tickets issued are when my car has been parked in my flats own space without a permit-bearing in mind I own my flat and as far as I am aware when I bought the flat, the space comes with it?!

b-the sum they are chasing me for, for these and all other tickets, are not reflective of any loss! (We do not have to pay for permits either).

c-regardless of all else, I cannot afford to pay them this amount and am pretty determined that I shouldn't have to pay them to park in a private residential car park when I live here! A lot of the photos they send on the tickets show the car parked in my space at the same address that they are writing to me at?!

If I can work out how I would post a pic of the letter received.

TIA

Neddy139

The_Deep

I would not be too worried, read this

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?377246-UKPC-liable-for-trespass-**SUCCESS**

UKPC are bottom of the third division being knuckle dragging former clampers Denver Securities. They have been taken to Court by Hull Trading Standards. Definitely not a force to be reckoned with.

Why not ask Mr Davey

http://www.5pumpcourt.com/member/Roger_Davey

if he will act for you on contingency?

Neddy139

Thanks for your reply The Deep.

I have seen that about the case in Winchester- problem I have is that I haven't been able to work out if I own the land my space is in or not..i believe I own the leasehold on it, as I own the leasehold of my flat. Would that encompass them trespassing?

I might just hold tight for the time being and see what comes in the post next?!

TIA

The_Deep

If you own your space it will say so on the lease and the Land registry papers which you received after completion, but normally you have a space which is part of the communal property allocated to out.

If you own your space you are in a very strong position and yes, ticketing your car is trespass. However, even if you do not own your land, the PPC may be infringing you leasehold right to "quiet enjoyment" of your property,

What does your lease say about parking, does it mention a permit?

patman99

OP, the lease is a powerful document so study it thoroughly.
Does it mention any requirements to be part of a permit scheme for parking on the site ?.
I bet you a pint it doesn't.
The lease trumps anything the Management Company or residents committee come up with.

As UKPCS are members of the IPC rather than the BPA, I would suggest reading-up on how to appeal using the IPC's 'independent' appeals service. Once you are familiar with it. Appeal every ticket and when UKPCS reject it, they should give you an appeal code to use.
You could cost them a good amount of money.

Coupon-mad

patman99 wrote: »

As UKPCS are members of the IPC rather than the BPA.

It is not UKCPS, it is UKPC who are BPA members and should have simply been beaten at POPLA every time (NOT IGNORED, Neddy139!). I am concerned about this, yes you could well find your case is chosen for a small claim:

I have received (yet another!!) letter from Debt Recovery Plus. This is not one I have had before. It is telling me that I have a total of 18 outstanding PCNs that date from between Sept 2013 and Feb 2014. There are more that I have received since February but these are not listed on this letter as well as tickets prior to Sept 2013 that are also not listed!

I helped write a defence for a couple who had a PCN each from UKPC (just two PCNs!). So rarely, UKPC do try a small claim and yours is ripe for picking.

Forget your point c about 'not affording it'. Stick with points 'a and b', plus a new 'c' (this was not necessarily the same driver every time, and the UKPC Notice to Keeper letters (if served each time, which you believe may not be the case) are flawed in wording and create no keeper liability under the POFA. Plus see the linked thread.

So yes in your case I would write to both UKPC and to DRP and the Managing agent but more like the complaint/Letter before Claim (YOUR claim!) in post #30 here:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4777418

You need to go on the offensive, in my view. You are on dodgy ground ignoring these - why haven't you been appealing each one to POPLA and costing UKPC £27 plus VAT every time? That would soon stop them!

But you also need to think about parking one car elsewhere, this is risky and if UKPC try a small claim you might get a Judge who decides you should pay...

The_Deep

I am concerned about this, yes you could well find your case is chosen for a small claim:

I very much doubt if UKPC will ever again darken a court doorstep, especially when it is an "own space". Apart from the thtashing Mr Davey handed our, there is this

On Monday 5th September 2011, UK Parking Control Limited (UKPC) and its director Rupert Williams are due to stand trial on indictment at Hull Crown Court on the following charges, following an investigation by Trading Standards -

Trading Standards lost all but one, the PPC had a better lawyer, but a criminal conviction is a criminal conviction.

• 1/ Engaging in a commercial practice which was a misleading action contrary to Regulation 9 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Regulations 2008
  
  2/ Being an officer of a body corporate which engaged in a misleading action contrary to Regulation 9 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008
  
  3/ Engaging in an aggressive commercial practice contrary to Regulation 11 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008
  
  4/ Being an officer of a body corporate which engaged in an aggressive commercial practice contrary to Regulation 11 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading regulations 2008
  
  5/ Engaging in a commercial practice which was a misleading action contrary to Regulation 9 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Regulations 2008
  
  6/ Being an officer of a body corporate which engaged in a misleading action contrary to Regulation 9 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008
  
  7/ Engaging in an aggressive commercial practice contrary to Regulation 11 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008
  
  8/ Being an officer of a body corporate which engaged in an aggressive commercial practice contrary to Regulation 11 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading regulations 2008
  
  9/ Engaging in a commercial practice which was a misleading action contrary to Regulation 9 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Regulations 2008
  
  10/ Being an officer of a body corporate which engaged in a misleading action contrary to Regulation 9 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008
  
  11/ Engaging in an aggressive commercial practice contrary to Regulation 11 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008
  
  12/ Being an officer of a body corporate which engaged in an aggressive commercial practice contrary to Regulation 11 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading regulations 2008
  
  13/ Engaging in a commercial practice which was a misleading action contrary to Regulation 9 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008
  
  14/ Being an officer of a body corporate which engaged in a misleading action contrary to Regulation 9 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008
  
  15/ Engaging in an aggressive commercial practice contrary to Regulation 11 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008
  
  16/ Being an officer of a body corporate which engaged in an aggressive commercial practice contrary to Regulation 11 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading regulations 2008

The trial is expected to last 3 days. If anyone want to come along and watch, I'll be the one with the huge bucket of popcorn.

It is understood that several of the charges relate to practices common to all PPCs who use ticketing to enforce parking rules on private land, and that if UKPC and/or its director were to be convicted on those charges, subject to the inevitable appeal it seems likely to be 'game over' for the PPC ticketing 'business model'.

I would strongly advise against publicly speculating or otherwise discussing the details of the specific allegations - Mr Williams/UKPC have already sought (and been refused permission) for a Judicial Review of the decision to indict them (on quite imaginative grounds), and ought to be considered likely to try to use any public discussion to argue that they cannot receive a fair trial (not that there could be considered to be any merit in such an argument).

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=63597

Coupon-mad

I very much doubt if UKPC will ever again darken a court doorstep".

Yep, generally UKPC don't do court, but they did start a small claim with the couple I wrote a defence for - albeit it was a residential (houses within an small estate) car park without allocated spaces. No idea if UKPC proceeded further as I wrote the appeal as a temporary paid contractor for PTAS who have since changed hands and who are not necessarily on top of their game these days.

Quentin

Coupon-mad wrote: »

.... No idea if UKPC proceeded further as I wrote the appeal as a temporary paid contractor for PTAS who have since changed hands and who are not necessarily on top of their game these days.

Why? (Or is it because they no longer have you as a paid contractor?)

Neddy139

Hi all. Thank you all so much for your advice. I have decided I am going to write to both UKPC and DRP. I have today received another letter saying that if they don't hear from me by xx December they will progress through the legal route. I assume this no doubt will be followed by relevant papers if I do not write to them.

Please help as to what I should be writing to both parties!!

Apologies as no doubt this is covered in various other threads but I am writing to them at the moment and not sure what I should be saying.

I am wary of the offensive route as I do not want to stir up more trouble but would like to be factual.

Please advise!

(Very nervous newbie!)

Thanks

Neddy139

Neddy139

Somewhere I have seen a draft letter to send to the DRP to refer this matter back to UKPC but I now cannot find this letter.

Could someone please advise what to write and/or send me the link or draft letter.

TIA