ukpp ltd Newcastle Airport

ShellyWidd

Can anyone please advise as to whether I should pay these apparent cowboys or not?

On the 2nd December 2017 I dropped a friend off at their Christmas party at the Double Tree Hilton Hotel, which is situated on a road leading into Newcastle Airport, I stopped just in front of the hotels car park barrier for approx. 30 seconds while they got out of the car and I then backed back out onto the road and left.
Approximately 1 week later I received a parking charge notice from UK Parking Patrol Ltd saying I was in breach of bylaw 1315. they said they had requested my details from the DVLA on the grounds of a PCN 6.3 - parking in a prohibited area.
I was very incensed by this and contacted them through the appeals process. Unfortunately however I had not seen or heard about this company before this time and stupidly told them I was the driver of the car at the time of the supposed offences saying the following:-

I have been sent a parking charge notice by your company and I wish to appeal this charge for the following reasons.
1. I did not at any time leave my vehicle, therefore was not parked, I merely dropped someone off.
2. There were no signs on the barrier to say I could not do this
3. There was extremely poor / no lighting on the sign which I believe has now been put on the fence adjacent to the hotel which neither of us saw on the night in question therefore no clear signage.
4. The above statement is obvious from the car which came up behind me and did exactly the same thing!
They replied within minutes with this response
Thank you for your letter of appeal against the Parking Charge Notice issued by us on 07.12.2017

Having carefully considered the evidence provided by you we have decided to reject your appeal for the following reasons:
The vehicle was captured via CCTV footage unloading whilst stationary in an area that is well signed with notices stating: "No Stopping/Loading/Unloading In This Area". There are signs around the entire airport complex including at the entrance that clearly state the restrictions in place. Security at the airport is paramount and any vehicle captured loading/unloading in any area other than the official car parks is immediately issued a notice by the CCTV operator.!!!12288;

The picture they sent me of the supposed sign is actually facing the Airport building which is some distance from the hotel and also in the opposite direction to the way I drove in. There was definitely no sign where I stopped at the time.

I obviously did not pay and have since received 2 quite threatening letters from Debt Recovery Plus Ltd demanding payment on UKPP behalf or they are taking me to court

I realise now that I was stupid to admit that I was the driver of the vehicle at the time and wondered if this makes as difference as to if they have a case or not.


Thanks in advance for any help and/or advice

Umkomaas

I obviously did not pay and have since received 2 quite threatening letters from Debt Recovery Plus Ltd demanding payment

Debt collectors are totally ignorable. Please read the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, post #4.

or they are taking me to court

DRP won't - they can't.

Will UKPPO do so, make your own mind up!

https://bmpa.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/203755671-UK-Parking-Patrol-Office

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

Just to say, we have seen no PPC issue any real court proceedings for any airport byelaws case. There's nothing you can do right now, as the next move is in the hands of UKPPO - if you get a formal Letter Before Action/Court Claim (from UKPPO or their solicitors, not DRP) or real court papers, come back on this thread for more advice.

You'll probably get a few more harassing letters from DRP, including a 'discount' offer. Then all will go quiet. The PPC, in law, has 6 years to pursue an alleged debt, but it's not something to lose any sleep over.

ShellyWidd

Thanks for the info.

Computersaysno

UKPPO currently do NOT take any court action.....so simply ignore all their begging letters [unless REAL court papers turn up...in which case come back here and we will help you easily defeat them.....]

waamo

As they are clearly invoking byelaws then I'm not convinced any of them could take court action.

The time limit for action may well be 6 months as a byelaws offence rather than the 6 years for civil debt.it would seem to me to be an abuse of process of I say it's a byelaws offence then sue for a civil debt.

Computersaysno

tHE REASON THEY DON'T DO COURT IS THAT THEY [oops] are using byelaws...and in theory they should be passing the income they get from all 'fines/byelaw breaches' to the COURTS...but they don't do this...they keep the money!!!


Going to court would be very dangerous for them....that's why [all??] the airport ppc scum don't do courts.

ShellyWidd

Thanks everyone for all your comments as I suspected they appear to be cowboys.

KeithP

ShellyWidd wrote: »

Thanks everyone for all your comments as I suspected they appear to be cowboys.

As you say... they appear to be cowboys.

You are not the only person to think that.

Four weeks ago today in the House of Commons our MPs debated this parking issue.

Sentences like "Rip-offs from car park cowboys must stop." and "Too often the parking cowboys dress them up as fines; they are not fines." were used.

Those words are direct quotes from Hansard.

Have a read of the full debate here:

hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2018-02-02/debates/CC84AF5E-AC6E-4E14-81B1-066E6A892807/Parking(CodeOfPractice)Bill

...or watch this video:

parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

Of course having seen that video you will then be very keen to let your MP know your views.

ShellyWidd

New tactic today from the idiot company. Apparently my "debt" has now been passed to Zenith collections, who have kindly offered me a discount from the original £160, which was actually £100 more than the supposed fine, to £136.00. They have given me 14 days to pay up or else saying it exactly like the following statement "IT IS OUR INTENTION TO COLLECT THIS DEBT AND PERSUE IT TO A LEGAL CONCLUSION IF NECESSAEY"


I am presuming this company is exactly the same as the previously mentioned one, but would appreciate any further advice


Thanks

Computersaysno

They are simply 'letter senders'......


I suggest that you refer them to the court case of Arkell vs Pressdram 1971.

The_Deep

Arkell v Pressdram is the correct procedure.

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, and another company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each year). They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

Hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned.

The problem has become so rampant that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Watch the video of the Second Reading in the HofC recently.

http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind they will be out of business by Christmas.