UKPC 'Left Site' PCN - wrong registration

SpongePS

beamerguy wrote: »

Please stop giving bad advice ..... IGNORE THIS ADVICE

The blog is dated 29th April 2018 and UKPC are currently not banned

Ah, okay. Will do!

beamerguy

SpongePS wrote: »

Interestingggg. So, do we know for sure this info is still current? The PCN was issued very recently.

IGNORE THIS INFORMATION

Pirate Parker is completely wrong and he should be ignored

Pirate_Parker

I made the assumption that blog would have been updated to warn they're back in action... I sincerely apologize.

beamerguy

Pirate_Parker wrote: »

I made the assumption that blog would have been updated to warn they're back in action... I sincerely apologize.

OK, look, you are welcome to post but only if you know what you are talking about so please be very careful in future as you could cost people money.

People coming here are looking for a magic fix and that cannot happen ..... to get rid of the parking vermin needs a lot of work, this forum can do this so all info to newbies must be correct

The_Deep

Leaving site is problematic. A judge may think that it is an unreasonable term in a consumer contract, and at least one MP thinks that it may breach ones rights under the Human Rights Act.

No PPC has won on this point since the solicitor for VCS in Ibbotson v VCS nearly got herself banged up.

UKPC are fraudsters, read this

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11858473/Parking-firm-UKPC-admits-faking-tickets-to-fine-drivers.html

and complain to your MP

It is the will of Parliament that these scammers be put out of business. Hopefully that will take place in the near future. The Bill has passed through the HOC without hitch, and goes to the Lords soon. 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

fisherjim

SpongePS wrote: »

Yet, the reason for this post is that the parking warden noted the driver's registration mark incorrectly.
Instead of noting it down as xx61 xxx, they put xx16 xxx, so does this present a different angle through which to challenge this PCN? The photo they took of the car has been checked on their website (without entering any personal details, of course) and the image does clearly show the correct registration.

No don't bother with that tack, this scam has been a UKPC ploy for years.


They do this to get the driver to appeal on that point thinking it's like a real PCN from an authority (where it would nullify the charge) but in PPC land they just correct their "error" when they send the NTK.



You are dealing with scammers with all sorts of dodgy tricks up their sleeves like the very scam they have added to this site.

SpongePS

Thanks for the heads up fisherjim, glad I didn't follow that path.

So I should be waiting for an NTK then?

beamerguy

SpongePS wrote: »

Thanks for the heads up fisherjim, glad I didn't follow that path.

So I should be waiting for an NTK then?

As the Deep said, very very difficult to prove you left the site

UKPC, who are known scammers at the best of times and their first ban from the DVLA was for faking pictures

It is up to them to prove you left the site which unless they want to be seen as predators, they will not do. If they did have pics then they must reported to the landowner as possible stalkers

The last UKPC warden I saw was a young chap in a white van, leaning on the van and looked like he was rolling a joint

Nasty little scammer but as we all know .... a scammer fully approved by the BPA ?

Fruitcake

SpongePS wrote: »

Thanks for the heads up fisherjim, glad I didn't follow that path.

So I should be waiting for an NTK then?

You have two options. Wait for the NTK or appeal on day 26 as normal.

The discrepancy between the information on the NTD and NTK is minor, and unlikely to win at PoPLA.
There are so many points that are much stronger, and if the scammers don't get the NTK out in time then you have an automatic win with non POFA compliance as well.

UKPC's signage is always non BPA CoP compliant, and it's virtually impossible for them to prove anyone left site. The site boundary is never defined and there won't be a map of it either.

Contact the council planning department to find out if parking is allowed for motorists to visit other establishments outside the retail ark.

I wonder what it says underneath that sticker? :whistle:
If you found a sign without it on and took a time and date stamped photo', the scammers would have a hard time playing the "left site" card.

SpongePS

That's perfect, Fruitcake. I'll follow the normal appeal procedure as outlined on the Newbies thread and use the points about site boundaries, signage and proof of leaving. Thanks a lot!