Carter Legal- Is this for real

Johnottw

Hi All,

A family member received a PCN at Humberside Airport , notice received in post yesterday. They stopped in no stopping zone for 30 seconds only for passenger to jump in the car and drive off.
It was snowing and they were not familiar with the Airport.

Reading various forums and online threads it seems lots of people have won appeals for same issue at Humberside Airport via Popla.

However it looks like VCS have now changed from POPLA to IPC Membership, presumably because they were getting hammered on appeals due to local newspaper publicity. The notice received from them yesterday says, appeal against their decision would be to the IPC.

I want to give them a fight but don't want debt collectors letters which seems likely if I pursue.

I then came across a website, which does appear to be for real, Carter-legal.co.uk , select the heading 'fine discounts' and says they will discount your fine by another 50% , i.e. £60 fine you pay them £30. Presumably they then send standard legal letter to VCS knowing they will will the appeal.

Has anyone used this service or can comment whether it is genuine. If it is, it seems like a good way of fighting back without too much hassle.

BenefitMaster

They are based in Scotland for the same reason we are.

There are several companies involved in appealing such charges, which are not "fines" and there are various ways of doing it.

However, since "not Relevant Land" should* be a slam-dunk win, even if it goes to court, I would use the resources here to fight it.

Start with the Newbies thread.

* Qualified because I was involved in a ParkingEye case where the District Judge decided that "leaving a vehicle" was not parking, thus the Byelaws didn't count!

fisherjim

Johnottw wrote: »

I want to give them a fight but don't want debt collectors letters which seems likely if I pursue.

Why they just send out bluffing letters and can't do anything!

Guys_Dad

What was the date of letter and contravention? If they have failed to keep to POFA, they can't invoke keeper liability, although POFA may not be applicable in this case anyway.

If they have failed to keep to 14 days, then that's a double whammy against keeper liability.

jkdd77

BenefitMaster wrote: »

They are based in Scotland for the same reason we are.

There are several companies involved in appealing such charges, which are not "fines" and there are various ways of doing it.

However, since "not Relevant Land" should* be a slam-dunk win, even if it goes to court, I would use the resources here to fight it.

Start with the Newbies thread.

* Qualified because I was involved in a ParkingEye case where the District Judge decided that "leaving a vehicle" was not parking, thus the Byelaws didn't count!

If "leaving a vehicle" is not parking, then:
1) the incident therefore does not fall under PoFA Schedule 4, so RK liability [which only applies to parking] could not possibly apply, and;
2) presumably PE's charge for "parking", and county court claim based on "parking" was accordingly deemed null and void?

PoFA Schedule 4 states:

"This Schedule applies where—
(a)the driver of a vehicle is required by virtue of a relevant obligation to pay parking charges in respect of the parking of the vehicle on relevant land"

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted

If the judge ruled against an acknowledged non-driving defendant on those grounds, he/she was blatantly incorrect in law and his/her ruling ought to be appealed. The driver may have committed a trespass, but it was not one to which RK liability applied.

HO87

It is also widely accepted that stopping for the purpose of allowing passengers to alight or board a vehicle does not amount to parking. Or at least PATAS and TPT have been ruling on that basis for many years.

Johnottw

Thanks for replies.

I think I will appeal this myself but can someone just explain a little more about the term 'not relevant land'

Umkomaas

Comes under statutory control. So the RK cannot be held liable under PoFA 2012.

See here:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted

bazster

Carter Legal is a scam, the website is an impersonation of Capital Defence Lawyers, a genuine Scottish law firm. Under no circumstances should anyone pay any money to Carter Legal.

hoohoo

bazster wrote: »

Carter Legal is a scam, the website is an impersonation of Capital Defence Lawyers, a genuine Scottish law firm. Under no circumstances should anyone pay any money to Carter Legal.

The SRA will investigate if you forward them a link to the web site.

sinizterguy

This is just SPAM. This is 2nd or third one claiming Carter Legal will pay your PCN with a 75% discount or some !!!!!!!!.