SIP Letter Before Claim

ParkingPeter

Okay thanks. I'll also head to the car park to double check the size of the bay next door which was 'encroached'.

Is the above template I sent strong enough for the first means of communication to a LBC?

ParkingPeter

Hi all,

I received a response from SIP.

They confirmed they are pursuing me as the RK and sent through photo evidence of the bay and signage. After having a look through a similar case, I've found the 'golden ticket' ruling which I think applies in this case. There was no mention of POFA on the PCN. Would the next steps be appeal to get a POPLA code?

Thanks.

The_Deep

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

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, and others have already been named and shamed in the House of Commons as have Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each week, hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned. They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

The problem has become so widespread that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. It has even been suggested that some of these companies have links with organised ccrime.

Watch the video of the Second Reading and committee stage in the House of Commons recently. MPs have a very low opinion of this industry.

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

https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2018-07-19/debates/2b90805c-bff8-4707-8bdc-b0bfae5a7ad5/Parking(CodeOfPractice)Bill(FirstSitting)

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

ParkingPeter

I believe they've failed to comply with POFA as they haven't carried out the below step:

Details of the discount for payment within 14 days, The Discount should be at least 40% of the full charge under the BPA Code of Practice (applies to BPA Members only).

There is no mention of this at all on the NtK, it simply states that I must pay £100 by cheque/credit or debit card. It does mention it on the parking ticket itself, but from what I'm reading it also needs to be on the NtK?

Coupon-mad

Hi all,

I received a response from SIP.

They confirmed they are pursuing me as the RK and sent through photo evidence of the bay and signage. After having a look through a similar case, I've found the 'golden ticket' ruling which I think applies in this case. There was no mention of POFA on the PCN. Would the next steps be appeal to get a POPLA code?

SIP are not in the BPA so you could never have had a POPLA code. POst #3 of the NEWBIES thread explains the difference between BPA and IPC firms and why the IPC version 'IAS' is considered a kangaroo court.

IMHO you could send the best appeal in the World and any IPC firm would reject it, regardless.

There is no golden ticket 'ruling' and I would be hugely surprised if SIP's Notice to Keeper (the first letter) was not POFA compliant. A PCN does not have to mention the POFA.

You should look at POFA Sch4 to see what constitutes a compliant Notice to Keeper letter but I expect it is.

However you have a decent defence, as you describe being pushed slightly out of bay by the object and obstructed no other adjacent bay, due to being next to a generator.

What you have not said about this underground car park, is the vital issue of whether the driver is a resident of that site, or the driver was authorised to park as a visitor of a resident or business on site.

Was it a permit holders area, and the car was displaying a permit?

Was the underground car park accessed by a secure key fob/lock & key only?

ParkingPeter

Coupon-mad wrote: »

What you have not said about this underground car park, is the vital issue of whether the driver is a resident of that site, or the driver was authorised to park as a visitor of a resident or business on site.

Was it a permit holders area, and the car was displaying a permit?

Was the underground car park accessed by a secure key fob/lock & key only?

Okay thanks for the clarification.

The car park is an underground car park - Student Village Manchester. It's not a resident car park, it's just for general use in the city centre so for paying visitors.

I paid using the online webpage. It's not a permit holders area.

The car park has no barriers so you can enter whenever you like and don't need a fob / lock and key to enter.

Hope this helps. Thanks.

KeithP

OP, have you used your real name as your forum username?

Then your really should ask MSE to change it to something totally anonymous.

To help with that, you might like to read this short extract from The MSE Forum Guide - Frequently Asked Questions & Rules:

Q. How can I change my username?

A. In most circumstances, this is not permitted.

The only reason we will change your username is if it puts your privacy at risk. This usually means you've inadvertently registered using your name, email address or something that gives away your identity within your username.

If you fall into this category, email forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com and request that it is changed, giving three alternative usernames in order of preference.

ParkingPeter

KeithP wrote: »

OP, have you used your real name as your forum username?

Then your really should ask MSE to change it to something totally anonymous.

Thanks, just requested now and should be changed shortly.

Quentin

Ask Coupon-mad to edit the name used in the quote in #16

ParkingPeter

I can't PM Coupon-mad. Hopefully they see this and can change for me please?

In terms of next steps, I've gathered that POPLA doesn't apply here so no point going for that. Would it be a letter of appeal based on the circumstances of how the bay was obstructed?