UKCPS Driver left site.....ongoing!

mrt72

Presumabley your daughter had not told them either way whether or not she and/or her passengers actually did leave site

My daughter's the RK. The driver didn't even see anyone at the time, let alone speak to anyone. They were as undercover as it gets

Thanks CM, I'll amend my letter accordingly.

mrt72

Just looking back at the NTK, they declare themselves the creditors, is that standard? It seems strange that in both the letters I've had from UKCPS , there is no mention of any other party other than themselves. Isn't this one of the points the judge commented on at length during VCS vs Ibbotson?

Coupon-mad

It is standard, most PPCs now describe themselves as creditor. It's one of the few things they get right, now, albeit there is no debt and no-one here pays them...

mrt72

I figured it was a standard thing, I'm struggling to find a non-compliance in the NTK....

and no-on here pays them...

No chance of that, not unless a judge tells me to

Did I read somewhere else that there is supposed to be 28 days from receipt of the NTK to appeal? Or is that an older rule....the one I have says that the period of appeal has passed as 21 days from the issue of the windscreen ticket has elapsed.....

Coupon-mad

I suspect the current UKCPS version of an NTK is substantially POFA compliant.

It doesn't matter really. If it ends up in a claim (unlikely) they would have to prove the driver left the site, and they can't.

Umkomaas

Did I read somewhere else that there is supposed to be 28 days from receipt of the NTK to appeal?

Standard BPA operator appeal window.

the one I have says that the period of appeal has passed as 21 days from the issue of the windscreen ticket has elapsed.....

Standard IPC operator appeal window.

UKCPS is an IPC operator!

mrt72

Standard IPC operator appeal window.

UKCPS is an IPC operator!

Ahhh thanks for letting me know, I know they're IPC but wasn't aware of the difference in appeal windows.....

I suspect the current UKCPS version of an NTK is substantially POFA compliant.

It would seem so. Good job there are plenty of other bullets, just in case!

mrt72

OK just an update, I've had a third letter from UKCPS, with a statement regarding the IAS appeal procedure that I thought I'd share. I've been asking for information on what photos they have, on whose behalf they're acting etc....they have responded...

"The IAS will give you the opportunity to appeal with further information. In return you will have visibility of audited site maps, site photographs and all signs at the location. In turn we can add further evidence and background to the issue of your ticket".

Apologies for the poor layout, that's a direct quote from the letter!

They're telling me that if I appeal to IAS (and lose, giving them leverage further down the road?), they'll reveal all.

They then enclose photos anyway, showing a car in a space, from three different angles, and a scrawled note stating what the car's occupants looked like.

Is this a new tactic, appeal to IAS and we'll give you the information you want? Does this even happen with an IAS appeal?

mrt72

Having never undertaken an IAS appeal (and having no intention of doing so) can anyone else tell me that what UKCPS are claiming above has any truth to it, that if you appeal they reveal all the evidence they have and give more details out as to why you were ticketed?

Coupon-mad

Yes of course, if you undertook IAS (which you WILL NOT IN A MILLION YEARS!) then UKCPS would cough up some evidence and get their charge waved through by their mates at the IPC.

But equally, if they try a small claim they have to supply the evidence anyway, so no need to worry and it's better for you if they refuse right now because that paints a compelling picture of their unreasonableness, in case you need to defend later.

Normally, UKCPS don't take many cases to small claims and just send some daft letters like the threatogram that's been mocked here:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5570715


Here's the new rules UKCPS would have to comply with if they commenced proceedings - have a chuckle about the evidence they would have to disclose:

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/pdf/protocols/pre-action-protocol-for-debt-claims.pdf

5 DISCLOSURE OF DOCUMENTS
5.1 Early disclosure of documents and relevant information can help to clarify or
resolve any issues in dispute. Where any aspect of the debt is disputed
(including the amount, interest, charges, time for payment, or the creditor’s
compliance with relevant statutes and regulations), the parties should
exchange information and disclose documents sufficient to enable them to
understand each other’s position.

5.2 If the debtor requests a document or information, the creditor must –
(a) provide the document or information; or
(b) explain why the document or information is unavailable,
within 30 days of receipt of the request.

The only issue is this bit - below - about both sides having to undertake a 'suitable ADR' so I would be tempted to reply and say that IAS is not a suitable ADR (loads of threads about this kangaroo court explain that!! copy what's been said before about Hurley and Davies and conflict of interests/kangaroo court/unfairness/burden of evidence unfairly weighted against the consumer, etc.).

6 TAKING STEPS TO SETTLE THE MATTER AND ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE
RESOLUTION
6.1 If the parties still cannot agree about the existence, enforceability, amount or
any other aspect of the debt, they should both take appropriate steps to
resolve the dispute without starting court proceedings and, in particular,
should consider the use of an appropriate form of Alternative Dispute
Resolution (ADR).

So cover the reason why you won't be availing yourself of the IAS and maybe suggest the Consumer Ombudsman as a more suitable ADR - the Parking Prankster posted about that as a suggestion, not that UKCPS will agree but offering an alternative, shows reasonableness on your part right now and reaches a stalemate.

Also ask AGAIN for the evidence they would have supplied to the IAS (don't tell them why, don't remind them about what they SHOULD DO under the new CPR rules...)! What you really want is for them to refuse and say tough, and start with their usual threatograms - because by doing that, they fail to comply with the CPR!