Didn't receive initial fine until court papers arrived

FuzzyDuck1

Dean 000000

If there is an "amount" of people claiming to never have got such letters, maybe they were never sent! It's highly convenient for these parking companies to send claims to the court against the RK where the onus is on the RK to PROVE they didn't receive such letters and this CANNOT be proved either way by Royal mail!!!! Very convenient in such that these companies can wait only 28 days after the notice date to be able to pursue the keeper without having to figure out who the actual driver was!!! If parking companies were adamant that the monies owed to them were legitimate, they should be sending letters by recorded delivery to ensure they can prove the notices were sent and that the RK can not deny ever receiving them.

FuzzyDuck1

Coupon mad

Am I able to contact NCP directly to request the lease information and or to see the documents which give them authority to enforce collection of unpaid PCN's on the landowners land?
If so some guidance of what to ask for in specific terms would be greatly appreciated ��

FuzzyDuck1

I contacted NCP yesterday (the person who responded to my SAR) asking if they obtained my data from DVLA under POFA and the email back today said "yes"!

beamerguy

Dean000000 wrote: »

Because I disbelieve the Amount of people that ‘never got a letter’ - and I detest being lied to, and the holier than thou nature of some of these threads.

I know better than to get embroiled into an arguement on this one - but I strongly disagree with your constant assertion that everyone is being ‘scanmed’ - they are not. Whether they are being unfairly charged/penalised or treated is another matter - but scam it is not.

It is a industry that is unregulated and sometimes guilty of trying to maximise their profits. There are also plenty of other industrys like this.

Bye

Funny ...... of course it's a scam. What could your agenda be ???

Coupon-mad

FuzzyDuck1 wrote: »

I contacted NCP yesterday (the person who responded to my SAR) asking if they obtained my data from DVLA under POFA and the email back today said "yes"!

OK. Maybe they think they are able to rely on the POFA if they are the leasehold owner in possession. This is perfectly possibly if they are a leaseholder in their own right.

And as I keep saying, PPCs do not get DVLA data 'under the POFA'. The question is not asked by the DVLA. They get data for ONE of the reasons they are allowed to which includes non-POFA cases, and they do not declare to the DVLA each time which applies.

This is nothing to write home about.

You do need to find out about the lease. NCP do not have to tell you about it, no, but the Council do, under FOI.

There are also plenty of other industrys like this.

There are NONE like the parking industry.

PPCs not only scam people every day, pretend to send letters that are ever sent and/or use old addresses deliberately/negligently, but they also play on impersonation of authority and misunderstandings. Such that people think they have a real parking ticket and pay it out of fear.

And then they abuse the court system and add sums onto the PCN that are unrecoverable (double recovery), knowing that 90% of people will either pay or be told by a clueless Judge, to pay it all.

This *industry* operates one of the biggest 'pseudo consumer contract and let's add on all the money we can get away with' scams this country currently allows and the number of people affected is truly enormous. Many of whom are silent, because they paid.

FuzzyDuck1

Ok forget PoFA but if they misrepresent under KADOE is this obtaining information that is being misused? I'm a little confused from the ombudsman info you sent to how NCP could have leasehold title.... I'm still working on obtaining that commercial land registry info as I explained downloading it into Excel is not possible :eek:

Coupon-mad

They cannot have misrepresented under KADOE as the DVLA do not ask under which category the data is being requested.

nosferatu1001

Council lease land to NCP
NCP now have leasehold title.

FuzzyDuck1

I've downloaded the title registers myself this morning as i was having extreme difficulty in downloading the free database of commercial land registry.

NCP leased the land from the previous freeholder from 26 Feb 2018. They do have Leasehold title. However, ALL correspondence i have received from them and their legal team including the Court issue states that the contravention took place at B79 7BD. The postcode on the Commercial land registry for NCP is B79 7AL.
Tamworth Borough Council bought the freehold 21.06.2018 to this land.

My questions in relation to this information are:
Does it matter that NCP Bought claim against me as registered keeper to a different postcode to where they have Leasehold title?

Although the lease was already in place when TBCouncil bought the land, as a traffic authority and the land is being used for Off Street Parking, Would the Traffic Management Act 2004 take precedence?

Coupon-mad

I would mention in your witness statement, the postcode/uncertainty about the location enforced under NCP's leasehold title. Some Judges might be interested in that question and the Claimant's hired rep might struggle to explain it.

Although the lease was already in place when TBCouncil bought the land, as a traffic authority and the land is being used for Off Street Parking, Would the Traffic Management Act 2004 take precedence?

My feeling is that the fact NCP have leasehold title of the land means it's under their control, as they are in possession in their own right. So personally, because of NCP's leasehold ownership, I don't think you can say it's not relevant land.