We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Beyond Stage to Challenge

I really need some help, please. I've gone through all the procedures and used the template letters but am still being threatened with court. The case was passed to DRP and also seems to be being dealt with by a company called Zenith.
Briefly, I parked my van in the permit only car park owned by my employers. I had a valid permit - which has been confirmed by my employers. The permit was in the side window, though admittedly not in a most visible place. However, the sign on the car park says 'Permit holders only' and nothing that is visible to anyone with normal vision says that the permit has to be on display!
I waited a little over 28 days to post the letter to UKPC/PCN (template from here) but then started getting letters from DRP. I used the templates again, this time emailing PCN. They sent an email back to say the time had passed to challenge and the case had been sent to DRP. I emailed DRP who said the time had passed to challenge. I've since had several more letters from DRP to say that I needed to pay the fine, which has now escalated to £160 from the original £60. I then sent a copy of the permit that was in action to DRP and explained that it was in the side window. They've sent another letter back with some more pictures saying that the time has passed to challenge. The permit isn't visible in the picture but it WAS in the van stuffed into one of the side windows. The picture of the sign is included - nothing that is visible says that the permit has to be visible.
Help, please. I don't want to go to court.
Best regards,
Nicola

Comments

  • fisherjim
    fisherjim Posts: 7,111 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    What did you find out about debt collectors when you read the newbies thread?
    Why are you contacting debt collectors?
    What did your employer say when you told them you are being harassed by their contractors?
  • Help, please. I don't want to go to court.
    Nobody can guarantee this. It may do - strictly speaking, this is a pre-action skirmish. But that doesn't mean that there is anything to fear.
    They sent an email back to say the time had passed to challenge and the case had been sent to DRP. I emailed DRP who said the time had passed to challenge.
    Ok so now they have stopped listening to reason. No panic. If they want to litigate they are required to send a Letter of Claim. That will also require them to furnish you with a significant volume of information at their cost. Remember it is for them to prove that they have a case on balance of probabilities.

    PLAN: Write to DRP or whoever is now corresponding. Tell them that you will not pay any parking charges as this is a disputed debt - at all times a permit was displayed in the vehicle. If DRP or those instructing them do not wish to respond to that point, regrettably no amount of further correspondence is going to take matters forward. Indeed, continued correspondence may constitute harassment.

    If it is their intention to pursue court proceedings they are now put on notice that:
    1. They are required to provide you with a Letter of Claim supported by paper copies of documentation in accordance with the pre-action protocol for debt claims (email documents will not be accepted)
    2. They are required, if proceedings are issued, to prepare particulars of claim setting out full details of the claim, compliant with CPR 16. Bare Particulars will not be acceptable.
    3. The operative that issued the ticket is required to give written evidence by statement and oral testimony if the claim proceeds to trial in order that proper evidence is before the Court explaining what steps were undertaken by him/her to check for a permit (which was in fact displayed).

    If the above steps are not taken, you reserve the right to claim costs for unreasonable conduct of the litigation pursuant to part 27 CPR in this matter, which is wholly unmeritorious.
  • Umkomaas
    Umkomaas Posts: 43,826 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    The case was passed to DRP and also seems to be being dealt with by a company called Zenith
    Please read the light grey block of text at the bottom r/h corner of the Zenith letter and discover just exactly who they are. You have nothing to fear from debt collectors, they cannot serve court proceedings on you; that can only be done by UKPC.

    While UKPC have dabbled in pursuing motorists through court, these have been where multiple tickets are involved and sums pushing towards (or over) £1,000.

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

    Just under 400,000 tickets issued over the past couple of years. Recorded court cases 403. So ticket:to court case prospect - just over 1%.

    Johnersh’s advice in tackling this quoting legal requirements/warnings is sound - he is a lawyer.
    Please note, we are not a legal advice forum. I personally don't get involved in critiquing court case Defences/Witness Statements, so unable to help on that front. Please don't ask. .

    I provide only my personal opinion, it is not a legal opinion, it is simply a personal one. I am not a lawyer.

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.

    Private Parking Firms - Killing the High Street
  • Redx
    Redx Posts: 38,084 Forumite
    Eighth Anniversary 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    normally we say IGNORE sc@mmer DCA companies like DRP/ZENITH (same company)

    but because you have had good , free advice from a lawyer above, do what he says

    after that you can and should IGNORE DRP/ZENITH and any other DCA

    what you do NOT ignore are letters which are either an LBC from the claimant (or their solicitors) , and do not IGNORE an MCOL from Northampton CCBC

    those last ones need to be dealt with

    so for now its send a FRO letter like johnnersh says , then ignore
  • fisherjim
    fisherjim Posts: 7,111 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    edited 18 October 2017 at 11:32AM
    All above is sound advice, but the employer should be the first point of contact!

    Its totally wrong that you should have to gothrough hoops for this scam!
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454.3K Spending & Discounts
  • 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.5K Life & Family
  • 259K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.