Cpm responded to my letter

Coupon-mad

I have no idea why you are thinking any next step is needed nor why you appear surprised they sent the usual rejection letter 'offering' IAS. Of course they did!

The NEWBIES thread tells you ONLY to submit the first challenge then sit tight. Post #3 tells you about IAS stage, this is the stage you should have expected and NOTHING needs to be done unless you fancy seeing their 'evidence' by flushing it out. That's covered in all other IAS/IPC threads, about registering INTENT to appeal (but not actually doing the IAS appeal in the end).

This doesn't even need a thread. This is normal.

LuK2007

Thanks Coupon Mad,

So I should just sit tight now and forget it almost...

Unless I get a court paper?

Umkomaas

LuK2007 wrote: »

Thanks Coupon Mad,

So I should just sit tight now and forget it almost...

Unless I get a court paper?

Precisement!

LuK2007

Hey Guys,

Just an update here, I have posted a link below of the most recent letter they have just sent me.... it has been a while since the last letter and this one is from a debt recovery company claiming they took someone to court on 04/11/15 and it was a landmark case blah blah,

With all your expertise do you believe I should pay or just simply carry on ignoring?

Isnt there an injunction we can impose to stop them keep sending up letters which are causing us distress / feelings of harassment

http://imgur.com/a/Bibl8

beamerguy

LuK2007 wrote: »

Hey Guys,

Just an update here, I have posted a link below of the most recent letter they have just sent me.... it has been a while since the last letter and this one is from a debt recovery company claiming they took someone to court on 04/11/15 and it was a landmark case blah blah,

With all your expertise do you believe I should pay or just simply carry on ignoring?

Isnt there an injunction we can impose to stop them keep sending up letters which are causing us distress / feelings of harassment

http://imgur.com/a/Bibl8

NO, DRP did not take anyone to court, they are low life debt collectors and as everyone knows .. (except DRP that is) YOU IGNORE THEM.

The case they are trying to scare you with was Beavis V Parking Eye and that was all about an overstay.

As you will read here countless times, you just ignore DRP, THEY ARE TIMEWASTERS and whilst you will probably get more letters, you keep on ignoring these morons.

Ignore the stupid statements they make about a landmark decision, if you read it, you will see it does not apply to you.

If DRP want to send you toilet paper, let them do it, it's at their cost, not yours.

Only the PPC can take you to court so if you get court papers, come back here.

IN THE MEANTIME IGNORE DRP

Time for some reading by you ....
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=drp

Carthesis

If all they're alleging is that - as per their response letter to your appeal - you failed to park in a marked bay, then Beavis (the case to which they apparently refer) does not apply as I understand it.

I'm sure someone will correct me if i'm wrong, but the Beavis case established that a "reasonable" penalty/fine/fee was applicable in cases where a limited period of free parking was offered to act as a disincentive to people using the free parking for longer periods to the detriment of anyone else that may wish to park, to the extent that it may result in the loss of custom to businesses on the site due to parking for new customers not being available. Think "retail park lets you park for three hours, but if the car park is full people might go elsewhere."

This doesn't apply in this case, hence Beavis doesn't apply. The PPC / debt collector is misrepresenting the facts of the case in an attempt to scare you into paying up.

Personally, I'd be considering a letter to DVLA, the CSA and the FSA (and one to the IPC, although i'd not expect that to go anywhere as they're not worthy of the name ATA) pointing out the misrepresentations and how that's a breach of their respective Codes of Practice.

Oh, and a letter to the Debt Collector and the PPC telling them that you've registered a complaint with those various agencies on that basis.

Umkomaas

This is what you asked in May.

So I should just sit tight now and forget it almost...

Unless I get a court paper?

This is how I replied:

Precisement

Did you study French in school?

beamerguy

Carthesis wrote: »

Personally, I'd be considering a letter to DVLA, the CSA and the FSA (and one to the IPC, although i'd not expect that to go anywhere as they're not worthy of the name ATA) pointing out the misrepresentations and how that's a breach of their respective Codes of Practice.

Oh, and a letter to the Debt Collector and the PPC telling them that you've registered a complaint with those various agencies on that basis.

It's all been done before. DRP and the PPC, are not interested in complaints, for them, they are living in an old carry on movie ..
"carry on regardless"

Carthesis

beamerguy wrote: »

It's all been done before. DRP and the PPC, are not interested in complaints, for them, they are living in an old carry on movie ..
"carry on regardless"

Possibly. But at least then you can always demonstrate that you've tried to engage with them, and can show that whatever complaints you make have not been properly investigated, and throw doubt on their good standing as a respectable company.

beamerguy

Carthesis wrote: »

Possibly. But at least then you can always demonstrate that you've tried to engage with them, and can show that whatever complaints you make have not been properly investigated, and throw doubt on their good standing as a respectable company.

DRP are not worth engaging with, IGNORE is the policy.

And DRP are NOT a respectable company, never have been, never will be