Unfair NPS PCN now £100

nigelbb

Fruitcake wrote: »

So you agree that distance selling regulations do still exist in UK law after all.


The PCN may not be covered but the parking service being provided definitely is.


Charging for use of parking spaces is covered by the regulations as shown in the EU Guidance behind the original Directive upon which the UK Law is based where it is stated: ''For example, renting a parking space...is subject to the Directive.''

In other words, EU law says UK law includes parking charges.

As my other reply explains this is incorrect. That's a misinterpretation of the guidance as this is a reference to renting a parking space not using a car park. The full context is that its relates to rental of accommodation for non-residential purposes e.g. renting a parking space or renting a lock-up garage. It's not referring to car parks.

Coupon-mad

nigelbb wrote: »

As my other reply explains this is incorrect. That's a misinterpretation of the guidance as this is a reference to renting a parking space not using a car park. The full context is that its relates to rental of accommodation for non-residential purposes e.g. renting a parking space or renting a lock-up garage. It's not referring to car parks.

We'll have to agree to disagree - and this has been discussed before.

Plenty of PPCs - especially IPC members - suggest that parking spaces are being offered for a fee - allowing parking at a price. It cannot matter whether that fee (rent) is for 1 hour or 1 month, IMHO it's still 'rental' (= payment for use of property).

Parking contracts are not among the exemptions from these Regulations. Parking is not a 'day-to-day transaction' where the contract is very obvious, such as buying a cup of coffee or a newspaper.

Also the Regs cover the situation where there is a lack of time for the full information requirements to be shown and the Regs give traders the chance to cover the rest of the information later, by durable medium. So that seems to fit this sort of contract and PPCs could easily provide the information - such as info about complaints and the geographical address of the principal - in any PCN or NTK.

As this sort of contract doesn't fit any exemption stated in the Regs, it's worth trying and has never been tested in a court. The only ones that may fit an exempt section of these CCRs are 'fully automated' P&D car parks.

[Text removed by Forum Team]

Coupon-mad

Posters tonight aren't helping so I'm off now.

System

m1nt,the advice you have been given about appealing the PCN is utter rubbish.These ppl are permanent fixtures on these forums for one thing only,to convince ppl to pay corrupt parking fines.

Have you ever wondered why these same ppl are always willing to advise you on whats legal but never ever explain to you in detail if its lawful.This tells me they sing from the same hyme book as those who issue the PCN and they work for the 'system' to line their own pockets.

A PCN is a contract,therefore you have to except the contract for it to be lawful.If you don't except the PCN they may take you to court but only if they can prove a signed contract exsists otherwise they are f****d.If they still take you to court,which is very unlikely considering no contract exists,then you can still win your case if you know how these corrupt courts work.

m1nt

Ok so is this what she has to send?

Dear {name of IPC member, only IPC members for this version!!!}

Re PCN number:

I am not ignoring your charge for a purported parking infraction. As this is purely a charge (not a statutory penalty) issued under a purported contract and the driver has not been identified, I require the following information so that I can make an informed decision:

1. Who is the party that contracted with your company for the provision of their services? I require their contact details.
2. What is the full legal identity of the landowner?
3. As you are not the landowner please provide a contemporaneous and unredacted copy of your contract with the landholder that demonstrate that you have their authority to both issue parking charges and litigate in your own name.
4. Is your charge based on damages for breach of contract? Answer yes or no.
5. If the charge is based on damages for breach of contract please provide your justification of this sum.
6. Is your charge based on a contractually agreed sum for the provision of parking? Answer yes or no.
7. If the charge is based on a contractually agreed sum for the provision of parking please provide a valid VAT invoice for this 'service'.
8. Please provide a copy of the signs that purportedly were on site which you contend formed a contract with the driver on that occasion.

If you believe you have a cause of action, send a Letter before Claim within the next 21 days and I will take advice and will respond.

In my opinion, there is a better alternative than legal proceedings, namely that we utilise the services of a completely independent ADR service suited to parking charges. This does not include the IAS appeal service - which lacks any transparency and possibly any independence from the IPC - unlike the alternative offered by the British Parking Association, POPLA, which is transparent and has been shown to be independent.

Do not send debt collector letters and do not add any costs or surcharges. I will not respond to those, so to involve another firm would be a failure to mitigate your alleged loss. In any case, the addition of any debt collector 'costs' is not my liability because the POFA 2012 can only potentially hold a registered keeper liable if certain provisions have been met and even then, the 'amount of the parking charge' is the only amount pursuable.

Yours faithfully,

pappa_golf

blowfelt wrote: »

m1nt,the advice you have been given about appealing the PCN is utter rubbish.These ppl are permanent fixtures on these forums for one thing only,to convince ppl to pay corrupt parking fines.

Have you ever wondered why these same ppl are always willing to advise you on whats legal but never ever explain to you in detail if its lawful.This tells me they sing from the same hyme book as those who issue the PCN and they work for the 'system' to line their own pockets.

A PCN is a contract,therefore you have to except the contract for it to be lawful.If you don't except the PCN they may take you to court but only if they can prove a signed contract exsists otherwise they are f****d.If they still take you to court,which is very unlikely considering no contract exists,then you can still win your case if you know how these corrupt courts work.

did Barry Bevis have a signed contract with Parking eye?


I would have thought the county court , then 3 higher courts would have spotted that there was no signature and kicked the case out

Quentin

We have a problem with this guy.


Do we feed him by continually refuting his nonsense or ignore him in the hope he will go away?


Normally ignore is the best advice, however we get so many newbies who won't expect anyone here to give wrong advice and may not realise just what nonsense is being posted as authoritative advice.

m1nt

I appreciate people have input and debate but can you please answer my question, the advice was to send the appeal asap. I have posted a draft of the appeal before I send it in the post. Is it correct? Would you make any amendments?

Edit - She currently has the car on PCP, not sure if this makes any difference?

George_Michael

blowfelt wrote: »

A PCN is a contract,therefore you have to except the contract for it to be lawful.If you don't except the PCN they may take you to court but only if they can prove a signed contract exsists otherwise they are f****d.If they still take you to court,which is very unlikely considering no contract exists.

If a signature is required before a contract has been formed, how do you explain the fact that verbal contracts can be as legally binding as written contracts.
Apart from this, when was the last time that you had to sign a contract when making a cash purchase from a shop.

pappa_golf

m1nt , I am going to hold back on your appeal , and let someone more skilled read it


back at post 2 or 3 , the dropbox photos , the charge is "non patron", not overstay or parking over lines or not driving a pink car on a Tuesday , simply "non patron".


now I am sure you must have some paperwork or bank records , or even letters from puregym saying "sorry we cant help" , however you WERE a patron


nowhere on that joke of a NTK does it say "no number typed in terminal" , it just states "non patron"







gather your paperwork together , and rebutly tell them to sod off as you WERE a patron




edit : regarding the PCP , they have got the details presumably from the DVLA , so ther PCP thing is non applicable