UKCPS - 10 months later another notice

italianie

Came home today and surprised to find a notice from UKCPS demanding payment of £100. The letter states Do note ignore this notice immediate payment required. My name is spelled incorrectly on the notice, it itemises a typical breakdown of costs.

This relates to a UKCPS ticket I found on my car last November for leaving the site. They sent me a couple of demanding letters at the time and I wrote back to them confirming their invoice would definately not be paid, quoting stated case VCS v IBBOTSON and few other key points. I haven't heard a peep from them since then until today, so a full 10 months has elapsed since I was last hassled by them and I geniunely thought they'd given up. At the time I got the first notice, I chose not to appeal through IAS acting on the advice of this forum, it was confirmed the ISA is a completely biased appeals proces so best avoided.

Should I write a further reply or simply ignore any more warning letters?

The only reason I think they may have written to me now, is because I helped a friend move house last weekend and I had to display 2 parking permits to park on 2 UKCPS serviced carparks, so they probably scanned my number plate and then drudged up my previous and decided to have another go!! Just seems to much of a coincidence with the timing of the notice coming straight after this.

I'm happy just to ignore any further warning notices and see where this gets too, I'm thinking that they will probably give up at some point, it's doesn't worry if they send more demanding letters or fake debt recovery, I'm past the point of worry about these cowboys. Not sure what the chances of them actually pursuing a court case is though, you'd think after IBBOTSON why would they waste there time and put themselves at risk of having to pay out if found to be in the wrong and the stigma that would come with loosing such a case.

Would appreciate any advice, just after some current advice and reassurance really as it's been a while since I checked in.

Thanks,

Italianie!

Gouryella

Well that could be the reason they wrote to you but I think they have just decided to go back through all the tickets that haven't been paid maybe over a certain time scale and then sent another letter en masse(?). The reason I say that is today I received what sounds like the same letter. Unless of course that is just a coincidence.

italianie

Gouryella wrote: »

Well that could be the reason they wrote to you but I think they have just decided to go back through all the tickets that haven't been paid maybe over a certain time scale and then sent another letter en masse(?). The reason I say that is today I received what sounds like the same letter. Unless of course that is just a coincidence.

Sounds more plausible, are you just ignoring your letter?

Gouryella

italianie wrote: »

Sounds more plausible, are you just ignoring your letter?

At the minute I don't know. I'm mulling over what to do. Like you I didn't appeal as per the advice but sent some letters and didn't hear anything for months till today. Sorry to be of no help.

Coupon-mad

Gouryella wrote: »

Well that could be the reason they wrote to you but I think they have just decided to go back through all the tickets that haven't been paid maybe over a certain time scale and then sent another letter en masse(?). The reason I say that is today I received what sounds like the same letter. Unless of course that is just a coincidence.

You are almost certainly right.

This relates to a UKCPS ticket I found on my car last November for leaving the site.

They sent me a couple of demanding letters at the time and I wrote back to them confirming their invoice would definately not be paid, quoting stated case VCS v IBBOTSON and few other key points. I haven't heard a peep from them since then until today, so a full 10 months has elapsed since I was last hassled by them and I geniunely thought they'd given up.

They are desperate. A 'leaving the site' case cannot be proven as long as the keeper or driver never admits such a thing!

We would suggest ignore follow up letters except for a solicitor's letter or court claim, which is very defendable. Never say who was driving, a keeper has a better defence position.

The BMPA (of which I'm a member) gives this tailored advice:

http://www.bmpa.eu/companydata/UKCPS.html

''SHOULD YOU APPEAL AT ALL?

Our recommendation for this operator: Ignore all but court papers but keep paperwork. Get pics of the site / signs if you do get a ticket and keep for later''

That link also shows that UKCPS court cases are still pretty rare; albeit they do sometimes try. Generally from Summer 2016 there is certainly evidence of this disreputable industry moving towards 'robo-claims' in bulk served with the 'help' of couldn't-care-less-about-any-details-let's-just-pursue-money litigation firms (BW Legal, SCS and Gladstones spring to mind as allegedly fitting that description).

italianie

Thanks for the sound advice. The letter I received is similar to the one in think link - https://bmpa.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/article_attachments/201640311/UKCPS_Letter_before_claim.jpg

Is it fine to ignore? It says this is a Letter before County Claim. Contact us for help with these on the BMPA site.

Coupon-mad

If you have a 'Letter before Claim' then you should respond to it, NOT talking about who was driving though nor the story of what happened. Not 'me, myself, I didn't see the signs' or anything daft like that!

Something like this:



Dear Sirs,

PCN Ref : *******

I have received your recent letter - clearly not a compliant 'Letter before Claim' by any means - but I am responding to clarify that I deny any debt to UKCPS and I require further information to understand your position.

I am the registered keeper of this vehicle and I note with alarm that UKCPS has failed to show me a single shred of evidence of a contravention. Your contact is aimed at the wrong party and without any evidence whatsoever that any party 'left the site'. Nor have you shown me the terms of the contract that you allege was breached and you have failed to identify the driver.

It would be unreasonable and contrary to the Overriding Objective, to proceed with litigation before you have clarified your cause of action. As a parking firm well-used to proceeding with litigation, you have failed to ensure that all parties are on an equal footing and in possession of equal information, paperwork and evidence of the purported contract. Please furnish me with the evidence upon which you intend to rely.

You cannot presume that I possess all the documents referred to in your letter. Please send me copies of all the documents, including any windscreen notice if one was attached to the vehicle, as well as any Notice to Keeper and photographs of the signage and the car's location, as well as proof of the alleged contravention. When I receive the documents and your explanations I will be in a position to make a more detailed response.

Of course, you must bear in mind that I am not only an unrepresented consumer but I am also the registered keeper of the vehicle so I am in no position to respond in detail, especially as no evidence or explanation has been supplied. It seems to me that UKCPS have no cause of action in any case.

I look forward to your response shortly. When replying, please confirm whether the intended action is founded on a contractual charge, a breach of a contract or trespass. Please also confirm that your contract with the land-holder includes specific authority for UKCPS to take legal action in your own right and that this proof will be produced for the court.

Yours Faithfully,


(name and address of registered keeper)

italianie

Coupon-mad wrote: »

If you have a 'Letter before Claim' then you should respond to it, NOT talking about who was driving though nor the story of what happened. Not 'me, myself, I didn't see the signs' or anything daft like that!

Something like this:



Dear Sirs,

PCN Ref : *******

I have received your recent letter - clearly not a compliant 'Letter before Claim' by any means - but I am responding to clarify that I deny any debt to UKCPS and I require further information to understand your position.

I am the registered keeper of this vehicle and I note with alarm that UKCPS has failed to show me a single shred of evidence of a contravention. Your contact is aimed at the wrong party and without any evidence whatsoever that any party 'left the site'. Nor have you shown me the terms of the contract that you allege was breached and you have failed to identify the driver.

It would be unreasonable and contrary to the Overriding Objective, to proceed with litigation before you have clarified your cause of action. As a parking firm well-used to proceeding with litigation, you have failed to ensure that all parties are on an equal footing and in possession of equal information, paperwork and evidence of the purported contract. Please furnish me with the evidence upon which you intend to rely.

You cannot presume that I possess all the documents referred to in your letter. Please send me copies of all the documents, including any windscreen notice if one was attached to the vehicle, as well as any Notice to Keeper and photographs of the signage and the car's location, as well as proof of the alleged contravention. When I receive the documents and your explanations I will be in a position to make a more detailed response.

Of course, you must bear in mind that I am not only an unrepresented consumer but I am also the registered keeper of the vehicle so I am in no position to respond in detail, especially as no evidence or explanation has been supplied. It seems to me that UKCPS have no cause of action in any case.

I look forward to your response shortly. When replying, please confirm whether the intended action is founded on a contractual charge, a breach of a contract or trespass. Please also confirm that your contract with the land-holder includes specific authority for UKCPS to take legal action in your own right and that this proof will be produced for the court.

Yours Faithfully,


(name and address of registered keeper)

Thanks for the above, it reads well, much better then I could do. Is this letter to be sent on the presumption that I have not sent them any previous letters, or will it serve the purpose in any case. I don't believe I've admitted being the driver at any point, should I message you my previous letter to them?

Coupon-mad

I would send it as is, regardless of whether you have written to them before.

I can't take private messages...

italianie

Coupon-mad wrote: »

I would send it as is, regardless of whether you have written to them before.

I can't take private messages...

Ok thanks, I'll send it as is then. I tried to put forward about 6 points of contention in my appeal letter to UKCPS at the time, but my response may have been a bit flawed and I maybe should have followed a tried and tested template.

Anyway I've sanitised the response I originally sent and pasted it below in case it's worth checking for any glaring mistakes, this was sent last year :

[FONT=&quot]Dear UKCPS,[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]RE: No Payment - Final notification and challenge[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Your Reference[/FONT][FONT=&quot] – [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Vehicle[/FONT][FONT=&quot] - [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Further to previous correspondence sent, I am sending you this letter, as notice and final confirmation, that I will not be paying your parking invoice. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Any further letters or demands of payment sent by UKCPS for invoice xxxx which I am resolutely contesting, including that of any debt recovery agency, are done so at full cost to UKCPS. All future letters of this nature will be disregarded and filed as evidence of Harassment, to be passed on to UK Trading Standards. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]I have made my points clear in my previous letter; I will not be paying your invoice. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]I must highlight the following points for UKCPS to consider:

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]1. The driver of vehicle xxxxx was parked as a customer of the site, they entered the store, namely xxxxx, which is located on the site, and the primary purpose of parking on the site at the time was for patronage to this store. The car was parked for a very short period, well within the allocated time. No person can be invoiced for walking away from an undefined area, regardless of what it says in the discreet small print of your signs.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]2. There is nothing in UK or European law to stipulate that someone cannot walk off a site, walking is a basic human right. Under ECHR article 5, your company would be in breach of this, by knowingly detaining a person within a set location, therefore making them a prisoner. Had there been a riot, terrorist or major incident on the site premises, it would be reasonable to expect customers to leave for there own safety, therefore walking off the site. I can think of several other less serious circumstances where a person would need to leave a site. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Regardless there is nothing in law to enforce or prevent anyone for walking away unless they are trespassing on private land. The car park in question does not fall into this category; it is open to member of the public throughout normal operating hours. To reiterate, walking is a basic human right, just in the same way breathing is.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]3. No attempt was made by any individual working for UKCPS to prevent the keeper / occupants of vehicle reg: xxx xxx from leaving the site or verbally making them aware they should not leave. There was no communication whatsoever by a UKCPS staff member, despite the issuer of the ticket apparently observing a customer leave the site. Therefore it is the UKCPS staff member who has knowingly allowed the customer to leave without warning them that they should not do so.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]4. The UKCPS invoice xxxxxx is not valid by UK and EU law, as it does not include VAT, which raises questions as to the integrity of your company and its business practices. Please send an invoice to the vehicle keeper, which includes VAT, as verification that your company is appropriately registered and abiding within UK and European tax laws. This will not alter the outcome, the invoice will not be paid for reasons highlighted, but there is a legal requirement for your company to provide a VAT invoice by law.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]5. UKCPS Invoice xxxx xxx. The £100 parking charge is highly disproportionate and not representative of the common parking fees for parking in Leeds City Centre during the daytime. Leeds City Council charges less then £2.00 per hour on the adjacent streets surrounding the Regent Street shopping areas. Other nearby private car parks nearby would charge less then £4.00 per hour.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]6. May I refer your company to stated case VCS –v- IBBOTSON. This case confirms near identical circumstances to the situation I am challenging and verifies that a customer cannot be invoiced for walking away from a free retail parking site. As a result of this stated case, including the evidence presented at court, the parking company was found to be seriously at fault and ordered to pay out costs, compensation to Mr. IBBOTSON and most importantly to look at its own internal company practices. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]I can assure UKCPS this would be the same outcome should you wish to pursue this matter in regards to vehicle xxxx xxx.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Please reconsider the above grounds and cancel the invoice accordingly. Any further correspondence other then a cancellation letter will be disregarded and collated as evidence for Trading Standards.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Yours sincerely,[/FONT]

Gouryella

italianie wrote: »

Thanks for the sound advice. The letter I received is similar to the one in think link - https://bmpa.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/article_attachments/201640311/UKCPS_Letter_before_claim.jpg

Is it fine to ignore? It says this is a Letter before County Claim. Contact us for help with these on the BMPA site.

Does your letter actually say "letter before county claim"? Is it a heading? I checked mine again and I'm wondering if mine is an LBC even though it doesn't say that anywhere.

Mine says "....we are therefore writing to inform you that this is the final notice before court proceedings are instigated. We are offering you the opportunity to settle your debt in full by paying the amount of £100. To accept this offer you must pay this amount in full within the next seven days. Your failure to comply with this final offer may result in court action being progressed for the original debt in full plus all associated costs which could exceed x amount."

It then just lists a typical breakdown of costs following court action. Is yours different to this? I am none the wiser.