We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
NTK from Dean Clough
Options
Comments
-
also, should I refer to it as "PCN", or "Parking Ticket"?
they've called it a "parking ticket".0 -
Obtain free proof of posting from your Post Office. Then it is presumed, unless proved otherwise (and how can anyone prove they've not received something), delivered 2 days after posting.
'Signed for' delivery can (and sometimes is refused by PPCs) be proved not to be delivered if postie can't get a PPC to put their 'X' on his hand-held PDA. They are in a better position to 'prove' non delivery, and given the disproportionate number of lost/missing/not received letters in PPC world, 'Signed for' can be manna!Please note, we are not a legal advice forum. I personally don't get involved in critiquing court case Defences/Witness Statements, so unable to help on that front. Please don't ask. .
I provide only my personal opinion, it is not a legal opinion, it is simply a personal one. I am not a lawyer.
Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.Private Parking Firms - Killing the High Street0 -
already asked and answered dozens of times on this forum, in other threads (helpful to read as many threads as possible)
a posted letter is deemed "delivered" 2 days later, like your pcn was
however, anything sent "signed for" can be refused, this then means you have no proof of delivery ; but actual proof of "non-delivery" - so not deemed "served" or "received"
so these companies can actually runs rings around you by not signing for mail, as they know they wont want to have this evidence with those who sent it
as for this "wotsit" , its a speculative invoice, nothing more, certainly not a parking ticket0 -
If they require appeals via email, then do so. Otherwise it gives them an excuse for prevarication. If no direction, do what suits you.
This is all getting a bit over-dramatic for a PCN (call it what you want) from a bit part PPC we have rarely seen before. Get your initial appeal in and see what they make of it.
I'd be amazed if they didn't (gulp and) capitulate at first base.Please note, we are not a legal advice forum. I personally don't get involved in critiquing court case Defences/Witness Statements, so unable to help on that front. Please don't ask. .
I provide only my personal opinion, it is not a legal opinion, it is simply a personal one. I am not a lawyer.
Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.Private Parking Firms - Killing the High Street0 -
ok, sorry about that - so much to take in!0
-
Obtain free proof of posting from your Post Office. Then it is presumed, unless proved otherwise (and how can anyone prove they've not received something), delivered 2 days after posting.
'Signed for' delivery can (and sometimes is refused by PPCs) be proved not to be delivered if postie can't get a PPC to put their 'X' on his hand-held PDA. They are in a better position to 'prove' non delivery, and given the disproportionate number of lost/missing/not received letters in PPC world, 'Signed for' can be manna!
'spose. I was thinking, they are (i think) the landowner, not just a PPC, so not ALL their letters will be challenges, so they don't know what it is until they open it, but I see the point.
Emailed it now anyway, will update with outcome in due course.
Thanks all for your help and patience, really appreciate it.0 -
:T just in case anyone's interested for experience sake they responded with:I have checked our records and carefully considered the points you make. I respond as follows:
(a) The sum of £100 (which is discounted to £60 for prompt payment) does represent a genuine pre-estimate of our loss and includes the time spent by our security guard in monitoring the vehicle in question, taking and downloading onto our database a comprehensive set of photos for evidential purposes, issuing the parking contravention notice and putting the relevant details onto our database and also our administration time in checking and logging the relevant notice.
(b) You say that “the signs were not seen” and “the wording is ambiguous”. You have not been specific as to what signs were not seen nor what or how the wording is ambiguous. However, I have carefully checked the photographs that were taken at the relevant time and I do not believe that the sign painted on the ground on this car parking space to show that this was a *** reserved space was clear.
(c) Dean Clough Limited is the landowner of the site. We do not employ a car park management company and manage our own car parking on site. We are a member of the British Car Parking Association (BPA).
(d) You say that the parking contravention notice “fails to comply with POFA 2012” and “breaches various consumer contract/unfair contract terms Regulations”. You have not been specific and no details are given. I am satisfied that the notice does not breach POFA 2012 or any consumer legislation and I would also point out that the wording on the notice has been approved by the BPA.
(e) The notice at the entrance of the car park (which has been approved by the BPA) makes it clear that by entering the car park which is on private land you are entering into a contract with the landowner on the terms and conditions which are clearly set out in the notice.
(f) Your comment is simply untrue as I trust my points above demonstrate.
In light of point (b) above and my belief that the notice on the ground delineating this space as a designated *** space was not clear I am making arrangements for parking contravention notice **** to be cancelled.
The author identifies themselves as "a solicitor [for the company]".
Quite curious as to why they've gone to the lengths of maintaining their GPEOL is correct.
I nearly responded with, if the security guard gets paid a ton for how long it takes to do that, have they got any jobs going ? But bit my tongue...
But they're actually right on why they see fit to cancel it, it isn't clear. I had a look and a lot of the "reserved" spaces are supposedly designated as such with what was obviously once paint, but that has completely worn off. This is allegedly the "offence" it was issued for.
I like the phrase "You have not been specific as to what signs were not seen". Well I wouldn't know if they weren't seen would I? How do I know they even exist :rotfl:
Thanks for the advice and putting up with my wittering; very grateful to all the obvious hard work that's got this forum and its resources up to what it is today.0 -
Congrats, well done.Je suis Charlie.0
-
Once again these idiots can't seem to differentiate between day-to-day running expenses and costs (including staff wages) and any actual "loss" suffered by the landowner because of a particular parking incident.
Are they saying that if nobody breaks their rules the parking attendant doesn't get paid?What part of "A whop bop-a-lu a whop bam boo" don't you understand?0 -
trisontana wrote: »Once again these idiots can't seem to differentiate between day-to-day running expenses and costs (including staff wages) and any actual "loss" suffered by the landowner because of a particular parking incident.
Are they saying that if nobody breaks their rules the parking attendant doesn't get paid?
They go to great pains to describe all the facets of his job, as if to highlight what a great effort it all is. But if that's true that's probably the most interesting part of his job, and if he no-one broke the rules he would probably get bored and leave, so you could argue they would actually have to pay him more to stay :rotfl:0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 350.9K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.6K Spending & Discounts
- 243.9K Work, Benefits & Business
- 598.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.9K Life & Family
- 257.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards