Parking control management and unclear signage

Fiss

Hi,

i've recently received a parking ticket from parking control management UK, a member of IPC. Unfortunately when we saw the initial NTK we assumed it was a scam, as we did not recognise the name as somewhere we had been, and looking it up on google maps took us to a place with a very similar name we know we have not been to.
(e.g. if the parking fine was for a place called "London town, Birmingham " google maps took us to "London", and the NTK made no mention of "Birmingham")

I had been visiting a friend who lived close to the area i parked in.

Firstly - should i send a message to them explaining this confusion immediately, as we have received another letter with an increased charge.

However, after looking at the evidence they provide and google maps of the location, i believe the signage is not clear. It appears on a wall at an entrance to what looks like a private car park on the other side of the road, with text being small and unreadable from the parking location. the sign was not on a lamppost where the driver expected any parking information to be and no other signage is visible from the parking spot. The visible signage could easily be mistaken by the driver as applying to the small car park, and i'm happy to draw a picture/map of this if you think it will help, and you believe it won't be providing too much identifiable information related to my case.



What is the best course of action?
Thank you very much for your help!

Quentin

Everyone is politely asked to read up on this in the newbies FAQ thread near the top of the forum before starting a new thread

You need to go there now to learn about the game you are now caught up in and how to deal with this

You look to be too late to appeal.

With IPC companies there's nothing you can now do except wait and see if they take legal action against you

#4 in the FAQ covers this wait and see/debt collectors stage

They have 6 years to start legal action against you

If it comes to this then come back at that time for advice on how to defend this

The_Deep

It is the will of Parliament that these scammers be put out of business. Hopefully that will take place in the near future. In the meantime involve your MP, the poor dears are buckling under the weight of complaints about these scammers. Read this one which I wrote earlier

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. Is has been suggested by an MP that some of these companies may have connections to organised crime.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, (especially 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.

Sir Greg Knight's Private Members Bill to curb the excesses, and perhaps close down, some of these companies passed its Third Reading in late November, and, with a fair wind, will become Law next year.

All three readings are available to watch on the internet, (some 6-7 hours), and published in Hansard. MPs have an extremely low opinion of the industry. Many are complaining that they are becoming overwhelmed by complaints from members of the public. Add to their burden, complain in the most robust terms about the scammers.

Fiss

Quentin wrote: »

Everyone is politely asked to read up on this in the newbies FAQ thread near the top of the forum before starting a new thread

You need to go there now to learn about the game you are now caught up in and how to deal with this

You look to be too late to appeal.

With IPC companies there's nothing you can now do except wait and see if they take legal action against you

#4 in the FAQ covers this wait and see/debt collectors stage

They have 6 years to start legal action against you

If it comes to this then come back at that time for advice on how to defend this

Hi! thanks for the quick reply - i have been reading through the FAQ, but i was unsure as to whether the initial template to dispute who was driving would apply to me, as they have provided photos of the car and the signage, although still not identified the driver.

It appears i am still able to appeal as that option appears on their website. although further reading implies i need to do a formal appeal rather than an informal one?

Quentin

Appeals to IPC companies are futile.


If you can then send in the template appeal in the FAQ to show you are not simply ignoring this

Then go into ignore mode as advised in the FAQ

Fiss

Thanks for the advice! would it be best for me to not only do the template appeal, but also add that the signage was misleading due to what i said above? or should i not modify the template in any way?

Really appreciate the help, thank you so much!

KeithP

I wouldn't bother modifying the template in any way.

For two reasons:

1) there is a risk of you inadvertently giving away the identity of the driver, and

2) it is widely thought that it won't even get read so it's a wasted effort.


IMHO, the keeper should send the template appeal unchanged.

Fiss

Re PCN number:

I dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a formal complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner and to my MP.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. Since your PCN is a vague template, I require ALL photos taken and an explanation of the allegation and your evidence, i.e.:

- If the allegation concerns a PDT machine, the data supplied in response to this appeal must include the record of payments made - showing partial VRNs - and an explanation of the reason for the PCN, because your Notice does not explain it.

- If the allegation involves an alleged overstay of minutes, your evidence must include the actual grace period agreed by the landowner. If you fail to evidence the actual grace period that applies at this site or suggest that only one period applies, this will be disregarded as an attempt to mislead. In the absence of evidence, it will be reasonably taken to be a minimum of twenty minutes (ten on arrival and ten after parking time) in accordance with the official BPA article by Kelvin Reynolds about 'observation periods' on arrival being additional and separate to a 'grace period' at the end.

- in all cases, you must include a close up actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date.

Formal note:
Should you later pursue this charge by way of litigation, note that service of any legal documents by email is expressly disallowed and you are not entitled to assume that the data in this dispute/appeal remains the current address for service in the future.

Yours faithfully,

Assuming this is the correct template, i am a little worried about how useful this will be, as they have already provided a number of photographs on their website, including the sign in question. it was also a residential area i parked in, would the statement about the grace period and PDT machine still be relevant?

thanks, Fiss.

Quentin

As already advised, its use will be for you to show you didn't ignore them!


It will be rejected!


Have you read the FAQ you were pointed to?

KeithP

That is the correct template.

It is asking for all the photos.
Do you know whether of not you have all the photos?

Change the 'i.e.' to 'e.g.' - I do believe that is a mistake in the template.



So IMHO, make the 'e.g.' change and sent the template otherwise unchanged.