CP Plus Railway Bylaw parking

Kasty

Hi all, I have been reading the newbie post, But I'm not completely clear though as my ticket was by CP Plus at a railway station. Another topic cover Indigo/not at railways. I am planning on sending the appeal letter as shown in the Newbie post but I just wanted to check that this is correct in my case?

waamo

Have you had an NTK? If so does it mention byelaws?

financerulez

Don't rush into doing anything, especially before getting all the advice on here. If it mentions byelaws your goal will be to delay as long as possible which will mean sending around day 26 after your notice to keeper.

waamo

I suspect CP Plus don't rely on byelaws and use the contract route but it's best to check.

Coupon-mad

Another topic cover Indigo at railways.

It will be the same as Indigo, IF CP Plus called the thing a 'PENALTY CHARGE' did they?

Or is it a PARKING Charge Notice?

Kasty

No NTK yet. Handwritten ticket on windscreen 26 days ago. The ticket does mention bylaws. I've not done anything yet. Was thinking I needed to send the appeal in before the 28th day of getting the ticket. Are you saying it should be after the NTK?

Yellow bag it was stuck to the windscreen with said 'parking notice', the slip of paper is states 'CP Plus limited £80 PENALTY NOTICE.' On the back it callsit a 'charge notice' ?!?

It quotes "Section 219 of the Transport Act 2000-Railway Byelaws, section 14 under which CP Plus has the lawful authority to issue this penalty..."

The guys issuing these seem to think they are coppers and are very aggressive with it, we haven't seen them since! Thank goodness!

Redx

wait for the postal NTK, then appeal it with the template letter, as KEEPER , after 26 days following the active date of the NTK notice (so not immediately)

you want to let it "time out" after 6 months , plus you want them to get keeper details to make it worse for them in the future

be elusive and dont play their game

twhitehousescat

if ts bylaws then use the indigo method , let it time out at 6 mths , so do not bother appealing at the moment , they cannot claim keeper liability if its bylaw land and they are stating bylaws ,

nosferatu1001

Do exactly as above. Consider this similar to "indigo" tickets, where they are saying this relates to byelaws.

Kasty

Thank you for your advice. I'll sit it out for now and wait for a NTK first.. In the meantime I'll look more at the advice for indigo too.

The_Deep

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for alleged 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 nearly always lose, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P.

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 most of these companies may well be put out of business by Christmas.