Meadowhall shopping centre POPLA Appeal CPPlus

Pinklady0805

You can appeal a PCN on the CP Plus .co.uk web site, should I send all future correspondence through there are should I just email them direct?
Or reply directly to the emails I've already started with them through parkingcsl ?

Pinklady0805

Ok thanks, I haven't been sent one bit of evidence yet so no don't believe it to be compliant.

Edna_Basher

RobinofLoxley wrote: »

In these Meadowhall cases CP Plus issue the NTD (windscreen ticket) but then PCS seem to send out the NTK's on CP Plus headed paper on their behalf. Also adding on another £40 to the Parking charge while they are at it, which is contrary to the BPA's COP.

Robin raises a very important point here.

The Notice to Keeper includes an inflated charge of £120 and does not repeat the details of the unpaid parking charges specified on the original Notice to Driver (i.e. £80) as required under Paragraph 8 (2) (c) of Schedule 4 of POFA.

None of these Notices to Keeper complies with POFA - yet they warn that CP Plus will have the unconditional right to claim payment from the keeper if the charges remain unpaid after 28 days.

A couple of months ago we submitted a complaint to the BPA and the DVLA regarding exactly the same behaviour by CP Plus / DRP at another site.

Unsurprisingly, the BPA weren't interested and closed their "investigation" pretty quickly, stating that they did not consider that their Code had been breached because in cases where PPCs had engaged the services of third parties to issue Notices to Keeper on their behalf, they were entitled to inflate the value of the PCN in order to cover the additional admin. costs. Utter nonsense of course.

Our complaint with the DVLA is still ongoing.

I suggest that you and all of your colleagues write formal complaints to David Dunford at the DVLA highlighting how CP Plus / DRP are in serious breach of the BPA Code of Practice by claiming inflated parking charges from vehicles' keepers not only in contravention of the requirements of POFA but also in excess of the maximum charge specified under the BPA Code of Practice.

Explain to Mr Dunford that you have referred the matter directly to the DVLA rather than the BPA because you have little confidence in the BPA's ability to properly investigate the behaviour of its members.

RobinofLoxley

Edna_Basher wrote: »

Robin raises a very important point here.

The Notice to Keeper includes an inflated charge of £120 and does not repeat the details of the unpaid parking charges specified on the original Notice to Driver (i.e. £80) as required under Paragraph 8 (2) (c) of Schedule 4 of POFA.

None of these Notices to Keeper comply with POFA - yet they warn that CP Plus will have the unconditional right to claim payment from the keeper if the charges remain unpaid after 28 days.

A couple of months ago we submitted a complaint to the BPA and the DVLA regarding exactly the same behaviour by CP Plus / DRP at another site.

Unsurprisingly, the BPA weren't interested and closed their "investigation" pretty quickly, stating that they did not consider that their Code had been breached because in cases where PPCs had engaged the services of third parties to issue Notices to Keeper on their behalf, they were entitled to inflate the value of the PCN in order to cover the additional admin. costs. Utter nonsense of course.

Our complaint with the DVLA is still ongoing.

I suggest that you and all of your colleagues write formal complaints to David Dunford at the DVLA highlighting how CP Plus / DRP are in serious breach of the BPA Code of Practice by claiming inflated parking charges from vehicles' keepers not only in contravention of the requirements of POFA but also in excess of the maximum charge specified under the BPA Code of Practice.

Explain to Mr Dunford that you have referred the matter directly to the DVLA rather than the BPA because you have little confidence in the BPA's ability to properly investigate the behaviour of its members.

Exactly Edna, Paragraph 8 states;

Paragraph 8
(1) A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to keeper for the purposes of paragraph 6 (1)(a) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met.
(2) The notice must:
(c) state that a notice to driver relating to the specified period of parking has been given and repeat the information in that notice as required by paragraph 7(2)(b), (c) and (f)

Paragraph 7
(1) A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to driver for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(a) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met.

(2) The notice must:
(a) specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates.
(b) inform the driver of the requirement to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking and describe those charges, the circumstances in which the requirement arose (including the means by which it was brought to the attention of drivers) and the other facts that made those charges payable;
(c) inform the driver that the parking charges relating to the specified period of parking have not been paid in full and specify the total amount of the unpaid parking charges relating to that period.

To complay with POFA the parking charge amount specified in the NTK must be exactly the same as the amount specified in the NTD. The NTK is non POFA compliant on that point alone.


I didn't know CP Plus had 'previous' for this.

RobinofLoxley

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Only too late for POPLA codes, not too late to ignore them. Come back if court claims are issued, and we will help defend these. What did the NTK look like, was it POFA compliant?

It only states they will pass the case to debt collectors (big wow, you will get some more letters - so what, really?!).

If you have a look at some of the earlier posts in this thread (i.e. #51) a couple of the OP's colleagues have been hit with huge claims. One in for £1350, with more in the pipeline.
I advised the OP to tell them to start their own threads and seek help, although I fear it could be too late but they seem to be in denial and are hoping it will just go away!
The whole siutation is quite a mess!

Coupon-mad

I agree, this seems to be a massive issue.

It screams out for publicity, and the group need to band together.

I bet this is not the only employees site suffering such rape and pillage by a PPC.

I think it will be fairly common this year for PPCs to pursue groups of staff, having seen the nurses' case in Wales. We all know that's being appealed, but the fact the first case was 'won' by Indigo (who must be so very proud of their *work* and I use that term very loosely), must encourage the scummiest and greediest bottom-feeders.

It has been noticeable that the *industry* (and I use the term very loosely too) has got worse than they were when clamping was legal. They appear more out of control, more greedy, more litigious and more able to do what they want, while the BPA and IPC (and the DVLA) stick their fingers in their ears and sing la-la-la...

Credit clamping is far worse than car clamping ever was. This (PPCs in general, and what they do, the entire business model) should be illegal.

Pinklady0805

Hi,
Just an update really.
so I think I'm getting some where with some of the other staff members.
i managed to get a few of us together today at work and we all agree, we need to fight this!
I've asked them to get all there paper work together in date Order the best they can so they can start appealing there PCN's and NTK letters.
Making clear under no circumstance do they say who the driver was!
I've Told them not to worrie about the debt collector's for now (hope this is right). Not researched that much yet.
We've all arranged to meet again Monday so I can show them how to use this site and access the newbies thread, then they can start there own thread.
Im quite worried for some as they aren't the best with technology but I'll try and help them where I can, as I too am not the best.

I'm taking everything your saying on board and I going to contact my MP and the paper, and if I get the sack so be it, I'll just have to fight that too! :-/

I'm going to try again to get a meeting with Meadowhall management, I very much doubt they will see me as they are now refusing everyone's doctors notes for dispensation. Staff have been down today and over the last week but management won't talk with them.
4 of the Older ladies today had there doctors letters refused
1 is awaiting an hip replacement and the other heart surgery, (this ladies consultant has phoned the centre and they still refused to give her a permit to park in the customers car park).
I can't understand how they can refuse a doctors note.


Cp Plus seem to be moving rather quickly this week, the girls are receiving letter's from scs solicitors with tickets put together as one claim.
The debt collectors letters are arriving daily.
One of the 2 girls has had a reply from court too.
I've asked them to send me pic so I'll upload when I can.

Coupon-mad

I've Told them not to worry about the debt collector's for now (hope this is right). Not researched that much yet.

Yes, it is right to ignore debt collectors. NO PHONE CALLS, NO PANIC!

One of the 2 girls has had a reply from court too.
I've asked them to send me pic so I'll upload when I can.

OK good, those with LBCCCs or court claims need to read post #2 of the NEWBIES thread.

Pinklady0805

they need to get on here fast!!

RobinofLoxley

Hi PinkLady0805. I was just wondering about your situation, any news?

Did you submit your POPLA appeal as it needed to be done by today.