Ukcps

Martin_Lewis_24.7

Hello all,

Looking for some advice on a parking charge for someone I know.

Basically, they parked in Manchester city centre in what looked to be an SIP car park at about 8pm for an overnight park. He paid £15 at the nearest ticket machine for a 12 hour stay but this turned out to be the wrong machine for the site he was parked. A couple of weeks later he received a letter from UKCPS "inviting" this person to pay a fine of £60 for not having a valid permit or authority. My friend appealed this charge as he had paid for parking at a machine that he thought must have been for the area he parked, plus there was no obvious sign saying otherwise (they sent through photos of signs but as it was pitch black when he parked and the signage had no lighting he did not see any of these). The appeal was rejected, and we later found out that the "independent" appeal company and the parking company are part of the same business. They have now sent through a letter saying he owes £160 and if this is not paid within 30 days they will take court action.
We have searched for the people that own the land of the car park, but so far been unsuccessful.

Just looking for some advice that I can pass on.
Does he just ignore the threats and hope for the best?

Thanks in advance.
:A

Fruitcake

After an initial appeal to an IPC company the advice is to ignore everything except an LBC/LOC/LBCC etcetera. If your friend gets one from a solicitor they should start by reading the guide to court from post 2 of the NEWBIES written by bargepole.

Always complain to the landowner if possible.'

Always complain to your MP about this unregulated scam.

Get photos of the site and signage without flash in the same light conditions as the alleged event, plus pics in daylight so you can actually see what the signs say.

onlyfoolsandparking

Its not been advised to ignore since late 2012 and it looks like he may have received a genuine LBA so he needs to look around the forum and find LBA rebuttal letter/s.


Go to the NEWBIES section and find out more about the game you/he are firmly involved in, everything you need to make an informed decision is in there.

The_Deep

They have now sent through a letter saying he owes £160 and if this is not paid within 30 days they will take court action.

Unless a judge says so nothing is owed. Let them take it to court for a judge to rule. In the meantime get your \mp involved as it 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.

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.