CCJ Set Aside CP Plus

tedharris02

The_Deep wrote: »

Wish I could find the time to. The company has taken at least a dozen other employees to court too it seems. Im sure theres others that mother isnt aware of.


Which is why you should find the time.

Maybe further down the line. As well as dealing with the Set Aside, I am moving homes and started a new job within a month, and dealing with a mess my current housemate has created in regards to bills etc.

Is it worth writing to CP Plus to request they provide photographic evidence, so it can be shown to the judge we have made such a request, or is it sufficient to highlight that no such evidence has been provided?

The_Deep

Indeed, judges love a paper taisl, especially where PPCs are failing to reply to reasonable requests for information, which, it they were provided, could perhaps prevent the claim getting to court in the first place.

tedharris02

Great, will see to this over the weekend. Been reading PinkLadys thread which has given me some more ideas.

Intersting development to the story, although this may muddy the waters a bit. The number plate on the car was changed, as well as the registered keeper. After a few days, CP Plus started to apply windscreen tickets to the car again, and have now started sending Debt Recovery Plus letters to the new registred keeper. Not NTK, nor evidence. Not even detail of the violation. Merely asking for debt payments instead.

I feel a strong POPLA appeal will be helpful here, but I noticed that they are no longer issuig POPLA codes from PinkLadys thread.

Coupon-mad

They MUST issue POPLA codes.

Simple - complain to the BPA, everyone should just do as advised on Pink Lady's thread.

waamo

DRP do a lot of the back office functions for CP Plus. They use a couple of trading names but it is DRP.

Frequently the NTK is from DRP under a different name and dressed up to look like a debt collectors letter.

Circs123

This is a reply i had from an strongly worded email I sent to Darren Pearce who is a director at Meadowhall and judging by the context of his reply is fully satisfied how CP Plus are operating. Maybe more staff should email him with there thoughts.

Thank you for your e-mail. Some of the points you have raised I will take back to CP Plus for further discussions and others I would like to respond to now.

!

By way of background, the parking regulations that we currently have in place have been decided upon by the Retail Partners Association (RPA), which is a representative body of retailers from across the centre.! There are 23 members of this committee, 11 zone representatives, 11 major space users and 1 from Centre Management.! It is this body, of predominately Retail Managers, that set the rules and regulations by which we operate the car parks at Meadowhall.

!

The motivation for setting up this parking scheme was to give priority to our customers, many of which have young families or are older customers, whilst at the same time providing a free to use car park facility for the team that work at Meadowhall.!

!

The bottom line is that this is a free staff car park that is very much a benefit of working at the centre not a right and is a rarity when compared to many other retail locations.

!

Of the 6,500 employees who work at the centre at this time of year 97% are fully compliant with the scheme, it is only a small minority of people that we are dealing with that seem to persistently flout the rules.! My interest in these people is not to be punitive or unfair but to simply ask that they comply with the rules so that we are consistent and fair to everyone that works at the centre.

!

No amount of correspondence and discussion seems to have moved these individuals (broadly 200 in number) from this path and we have had no alternative but to pursue 100 individuals through the court not to make money out of them but to find a remedy to encourage their compliance.! The reality with these individuals is that some could be prosecuted for many thousands of pounds but the maximum I have asked of the majority, who have multiple fines against them, is £1,500.! The only exception to this is where an individual persists with their non-compliance and exhibits unacceptable behaviour to the team.

!

Whilst there are robust processes that have been put in place to stop incorrect ticketing, where it is proven that the individual was not on duty, the ticket should be cancelled immediately through the appeals process.

!

The reality is certain individuals are not observing the rules and feel as though they are above the vast majority of us including myself who day in and day out comply with the parking regulations.! If they parked in the designated free spaces provided in the staff car park they would not be encountering these problems.

!

On the DP issue I am more than happy that we are compliant on this point but will check again to ensure I am correct on this point.

!

Finally I am more than happy to meet with Clive or Jill, as I have done so on previous occasions and if they feel there is anything we can do to improve the situation I will happily go back to the RPA with those recommendations.

!

Regards

!

Darren Pearce

Circs123

Clive and Gill he refers to are Mps Clive Betts and Gill Furniss. I ha e emailed both Mps the other day and await their replies.
Not got round to emailing the press yet for what it's worth.
I did respond back to Darren Pearce in reply to the above. Not yet received anything back.
I understand where he's coming from regarding staff who constantly park in the customer car park whilst on duty but there are zero reservations in place for staff who cannot find a space in the staff car park and also staff who are OFF DUTY and are visiting as a shopper or said vehicle driven by someone else.

tedharris02

Thanks Circs, very useful/

Think I will have to push the point of reasonable adjustments, and the fact that its in violation of the equalities act.

Coupon-mad

That man should be ashamed of the entire thing, not defend it, pretend this is normal.

How dare they ruin their employees, financially, allowing an 'outrageous scam' (Hansard 2.2.18).

JEEZ these are so easy to appeal and win, why doesn't someone just tell all employees what to do?

IT IS EASY.

CP Plus can't hold keepers liable, so appeal as keeper on day 26 from a windscreen PCN, get a POPLA code and win at POPLA, it's not hard.

If no POPLA code arrives, everyone complains immediately on day 36 (after appeal) to the BPA.

I cannot believe numpties have paid four figure sums. What's the matter with people?

tedharris02

Because they speak to HR, managers, etc and get given completely wrong advice. Plus when you get given a ticket every time you go into the car park, you kinda give up. There needs to be a more permanent solution to this, tbh.

But in the meantime Ill take up your advice for any future windscreen tickets.