Do I reply to UKPC Final Reminder?

beamerguy

Fruitcake wrote: »

The PPC will probably have the correct reg number but use this a deliberate trick in the hope that victims will contact them and give away who was driving the car. This means the PPC saves 2.50 quid and the victim loses the POFA 2012 appeal point before they even start.
I'm surprised you weren't aware of this as someone who is supposedly trying to advise people on how to deal with parking scammers.


I would suggest your heart is in the right lace but that you should do a little more research before you post possibly damaging advice next time.

Yes, I am aware that these scammers get up to all tricks but, as advised, the PPC can do nothing if their paperwork is incorrect especially a reg number. That is not damaging advice, it is common sense to ignore it. If the PCC concerned is so stupid to give the wrong information, they must expect no reply. What the PPC cannot do is change the information later, the recent PPC banned by the DVLA rather confirms this

Redx

the leading campaigner on private parking matters is parking prankster, he has collated the following in-depth viewpoint on the current situation
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/consumer-ombudsman-can-deal-with.html

for BPA MEMBERS , it says this (which has been the case for 3 years now

BPA Members

POPLA should be used as a first appeals process. POPLA is binding on the operator but not on the motorist.

if the PPC is a member of the IPC, then alternatives are now put forward due to new legislation

IPC Members

The IPC offer the IAS, which is in The Prankster's opinion a kangaroo court with secretive assessors who do not understand consumer law or parking law, resulting in bizarre judgments in favour of the operator.

The IAS operates in two modes, normal mode, which is free to the motorist and non-binding, and screw-the-motorist mode, which costs a non-refundable £15, and is binding on the motorist.

The motorist may decide to use the normal mode, on the grounds that the result will be so bizarre that the operator would dare not use it in court. However, on no circumstances should anyone consider using the screw-the-motorist mode; this is in essence throwing money down the drain, if the verdicts The Prankster has seen has anything to go by.

This does leave the motorist in a dilemma; refusing to use ADR might be seen in a bad light by the courts. The motorist should therefore not refuse to use ADR, but politely point the operator to a fairer service.

I think the above statements plus the whole of that blog sets out the stall a lot better under the current rules, laws and viewpoints

until the industry is changed by some major upheaval or government intervention, we are all sailing along trying to help in the best ways possible, but I have always found that using popla is better than arguing, as do most people, especially when it was the only ADR service available

now there are two ADR services, the waters are muddier, hence the latest prankster blog

anyone with a parking charge notice should read his blogs , especially that blog, plus the newbies sticky thread (which now refers people to that blog) and act accordingly

sticking fingers in the ears and singing LA LA LA loudly doesnt stop the harassment and bullying practices, nor trying the one-upmanship technique of arguing until blue in the face

the 2 people who have posted in this thread who need help need to check if their PPC is a BPA or IPC member, read the blog , read the newbies sticky thread, and act accordingly (Beavis case or no Beavis case)

we can assume more blogs will appear and advice may change after 04 November 2015, when the Beavis judgment is handed down

beamerguy

Redx wrote: »

the leading campaigner on private parking matters is parking prankster, he has collated the following in-depth viewpoint on the current situation
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/consumer-ombudsman-can-deal-with.html

for BPA MEMBERS , it says this (which has been the case for 3 years now

if the PPC is a member of the IPC, then alternatives are now put forward due to new legislation

I think the above statements plus the whole of that blog sets out the stall a lot better under the current rules, laws and viewpoints

until the industry is changed by some major upheaval or government intervention, we are all sailing along trying to help in the best ways possible, but I have always found that using popla is better than arguing, as do most people, especially when it was the only ADR service available

now there are two ADR services, the waters are muddier, hence the latest prankster blog

anyone with a parking charge notice should read his blogs , especially that blog, plus the newbies sticky thread (which now refers people to that blog) and act accordingly

sticking fingers in the ears and singing LA LA LA loudly doesnt stop the harassment and bullying practices, nor trying the one-upmanship technique of arguing until blue in the face

the 2 people who have posted in this thread who need help need to check if their PPC is a BPA or IPC member, read the blog , read the newbies sticky thread, and act accordingly (Beavis case or no Beavis case)

we can assume more blogs will appear and advice may change after 04 November 2015, when the Beavis judgment is handed down

Totally agree and I subscribe to parking prankster. The only service that I will use is The Traffic Penalty Tribunal WHICH IS an unbiased government organisation. I have won 3 out of 3 cases via them, to a point that one council was bombarded with requests for refunds as I got the local newspaper involved. As you know The Traffic Penalty Tribunal does not cover PPC tickets, maybe this is the route the government should go down which would be truly independent.

With regards to the PPC bullying and harassment, that is so easy to stop them in their tracks

Coupon-mad

With regards to the PPC bullying and harassment, that is so easy to stop them in their tracks

Trouble is you are saying it's easy to beat PPCs without appeals but you cannot do that with the likes of, say, Napier, District Enforcement or ParkingEye. People taking your route would be sued, chewed up and spat out. You know about Beavis ParkingEye...the story so far? If not, you need to.

And as SchoolRunMum on pepipoo I also know how to win Council tickets and agree that TPT and PATAS can be the way to win those - I'd never just pay one. Glad to read of your success.

But private parking tickets and winning at POPLA is a different ball game entirely.

as advised, the PPC can do nothing if their paperwork is incorrect especially a reg number. That is not damaging advice, it is common sense to ignore it.

No-one here nor on pepipoo tells someone with a wrong VRN on a PCN to appeal - we do know what we are doing!

beamerguy

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Trouble is you are saying it's easy to beat PPCs without appeals but you cannot do that with the likes of, say, Napier, District Enforcement or ParkingEye. People taking your route would be sued, chewed up and spat out. You know about Beavis ParkingEye...the story so far? If not, you need to.

And as SchoolRunMum on pepipoo I also know how to win Council tickets and agree that TPT and PATAS can be the way to win those - I'd never just pay one. Glad to read of your success.

But private parking tickets and winning at POPLA is a different ball game entirely.


No-one here nor on pepipoo tells someone with a wrong VRN on a PCN to appeal - we do know what we are doing!

Yes, I am fully aware of the Beavis v Parking eye case but in reality the case is all about "fair charges" not about the methods these bods use and that is a different ball game. Parking Eye maybe in your eyes a nasty company and I can assure you that will not chew me up and spit me out. Will let you know if I ever get a ticket from them and what happens.
I did not say it was easy for everyone, time and effort need to go into it

As they say each to their own, I enjoy and have fun doing it my way and it works You should have fun as well doing it your way, probably both work well.

The time will come when Parking Eye and the other donkeys will get their wings clipped and we must all make sure this will happen regardless of how you handle them

Coupon-mad

beamerguy wrote: »

The time will come when Parking Eye and the other donkeys will get their wings clipped and we must all make sure this will happen regardless of how you handle them

Totally agree. Believe me, my methods of attack do not stop merely at appeals and the same is true of many regulars here.

beamerguy

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Totally agree. Believe me, my methods of attack do not stop merely at appeals and the same is true of many regulars here.

That's good to hear but you know, whilst MSE is brilliant for getting in touch with other like minded people, the vast majority of the population never read or use it so when they get a parking ticket, they probably just pay it keeping food on the table for the PPC's.
IT IS OUR JOB, (THE FEW) to ensure we take the food off the tables from these low life

Coupon-mad

Yup, that's why other options exist including Parking Cowboys, the Prankster and the BMPA.

beamerguy

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Yup, that's why other options exist including Parking Cowboys, the Prankster and the BMPA.

After doing much research and especially the appeals system, I came across this from the BPA
http://www.britishparking.co.uk/News/monday-musing-scottish-shout-out
Scroll down to see the comments. Although they are 3 months old, it is worth noting that people in Scotland treat the PPC's with the contempt they deserve.
In particular the Sheriff (same as our County Court) The Scottish Courts have given short shrift to parking companies attempting to enforce their unlawful penalties, it's a pity the English courts haven't taken the same approach.

So tomorrow we will hear about the Beavis case and dependent how that goes will point us in the right direction to handle these donkey parking companies. Even if the Supreme Court says the charge is fair, there are still many other routes we can use and we must drag these donkeys back to the gutter where they belong

bazster

You appear to be totally unaware of the crucial differences in the law between England and Scotland.

It is worth noting that there are only 2 comments under that BPA drivel. David Carrod is one of the leading campaigners, appeal writers and County Court defenders in the private parking arena and he strongly advises PPC "victims" in England and Wales to use PoPLA when it is available.

The other commenter is me.

The reason why, in our comments, David and I gave categorical advice to IGNORE is, quite simply, that the law is different in Scotland (and there's no PoPLA in Scotland anyway). Our advice for anyone with a fake fine in England/Wales would be quite different.

You also seem to be unaware that, by PoPLA's own figures, approximately 50% of appeals are successful. That's a pretty high proportion considering that many appellants are clueless about how to do it and will be submitting appeals full of useless points of mitigation. Where appeals are based on sound points of law, as advised here and written by PPA, the success rate is more like 99.99%.

Spending half-an-hour cutting, pasting and tailoring a PoPLA appeal is a darned sight easier than defending a court claim.