Late Parking fine by CP Plus

Coupon-mad

And then submit the template (keeper) appeal today if the Service Station are useless. CP Plus will cancel, I expect, as they recognise the template.

Apexilon

Okay, rang the service station, no answer. so sent off the appeal letter with just the charge reference at the top, and registered keeper details at the bottom and similar details on the online appeal form. Nothing further added. Will update with outcome - wish me luck!

Redx

for clarity, POFA is a law that came into being in 2012 , and like a lot of things these days is abbreviated , but that law applies in england and wales, IF THEY WISH TO USE IT

the fact that some companies fail to use it or dont bother to use it is telling, in my mind it should have been made MANDATORY

and google tells you what POFA is when you search those letters

if a company fail to use POFA compliance on wording and timescales, when contacting a KEEPER by post, then that keeper has the right to say FRO and mither the driver, who shall not be named

so the KEEPER gets "off" on a technicality, but why should a keeper even bother to help a PPC to do its own job free of charge ?

there are probably a lot of laws you dont know about that apply to you
IGNORANCE is no excuse in the eyes of the law

hence why non-compliance with POFA2012 timescales and wordings means a keeper will always win, as long as they dont blab about who was driving

hence why you say "WE" , or THE DRIVER" etc

I always write the following on here

no "ME , MYSELF & I" in any "story" - this isnt an english O level test

Apexilon

Thank you very much, good to know!
At the moment I'm trying to find an old fine where the DRIVER was caught driving in a 24hr bus lane (inside/nearside lane) in Barking at 3am, at least in that instance the photo clearly showed the car, reg, road markings, street names as well id details of the camera that took the image. All giving the appearance of caught bang to rights.


This one on the other hand is so vague, CP PLUS had to tag the reg alongside the image as could not even be seen at all in the night photo. If I was allowed to post that image I would.


Its borderline extortion: attempt to claim funds where there's no grounds of proof to the claim.

KeithP

Apexilon wrote: »

If I was allowed to post that image I would.

You are allowed. What's stopping you?

Coupon-mad

Have you submitted the template appeal? You are already late.

Apexilon

Hiya, already sent off on the 30th as per post #13


The more the letter is looked at, the more there are issues and inconsistencies with it. I don't know how things work, but surely (assuming the template appeal sent off doesn't work) it doesn't need a solicitor to point out the issues?


The opening bit to the Keeper states:
"The vehicle was recorded parked on our client's property at MOTO Cherwell from 14/07/2018 23:37 to 15/07/218 05:19."


Problem with this is with the two photos:
1) Photo one which I mentioned has "a car" driving at night (barely unidentifiable as dark and has headlights on) is on camera date and timestamp 14/07/2018 23:37
2) Photo two which has "a car" driving in better light during the day (the make of the car can maybe guessed, the model possibly? the colour however is up for debate) is on camera 15/07/218 05:19 also on "a road".


Not only is the reg unclear in both pictures, but both pictures individually show "a car" on "a road" at the time the keeper's car was supposed to be parked in a bay on the property.

Apexilon

[FONT=&quot]UPDATE (Win!!!):
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Dear Sir/Madam,[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Thank you for your correspondence relating to your Parking Charge Notice (PCN).[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Further to your representations, we have investigated your claims and can confirm that your Notice has subsequently been cancelled in full and no further action will be taken.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Yours faithfully,[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]CP PLUS LIMITED[/FONT]

beamerguy

Apexilon wrote: »

[FONT=&quot]UPDATE (Win!!!):
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Dear Sir/Madam,[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Thank you for your correspondence relating to your Parking Charge Notice (PCN).[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Further to your representations, we have investigated your claims and can confirm that your Notice has subsequently been cancelled in full and no further action will be taken.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Yours faithfully,[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]CP PLUS LIMITED[/FONT]

Well done .... you have caught out CP Plus scamming:T

Apexilon

Alas, I am amazingly surprised how much power a template letter has! And how quickly they backed down (7 working days I take it, when they quoted up to 35 days to respond?).


May I just say: THANK YOU ALL !!!


PS: So I'm wondering, surely CP PLUS backing down so readily to that letter in some form is an admission they don't have any power/grounds on that fine. Doesn't that beg the question how many such similar "fines" have they issued and collected funds from? Does that not open up a question of "obtaining funds via illegal means"?


Has anyone ever wondered if freedom of information act covers finding out how many and how much has been raised, and thus penalising this company?