CST letters' forum group thread

Coupon-mad

You don't need to apologise; I say you ARE posting in the right place. All CST Law letters should be here, it's just that you don't actually need to do anything with this one.  

I really hope everyone on this thread is going to take time out, like us regulars have, and DO THIS PLEASE.  I hope you all realise you can actually say things to Government now about this scam, the amount of the parking charge and the misery you've experienced.

If you think debt collectors and robo-claim solicitors shouldn't be part of this equation NOW IS THE TIME TO SAY SO AND BE HEARD.

PLEASE CHANNEL YOUR ANGER ABOUT THIS PATHETIC CHARGE TO CHANGE THE WAY THE PARKING INDUSTRY WORK:

CALLING ALL NEWBIES! 

 

An urgent task – deadline approaching in a week or so:

Please now make a real difference because not enough people have yet, and time is running out. 

The Government is consulting for just a few more days, about a new statutory code of practice (CoP) and framework intended to rein in the rogue parking firms. 

Does it go far enough?  Read and comment on the draft CoP proposal and the enforcement framework consultation (two separate consultation documents).

HOW TO DO THE SUBMISSIONS:

BSI PAS 232 – COMMENTING ON THE CODE OF PRACTICE AS DRAFTED:

1.    You will need to register then log in, to comment on the CoP and enter an occupation even if you are retired or a homemaker.  

 

2.    Register, log into the BSI page, and download & read the cover letter here:

https://standardsdevelopment.bsigroup.com/projects/2020-00193#/section

 

3.    Read the cover letter again and note the suggested extra questions... if you agree that, say, the 'loading/unloading and dropping off, asking for directions, and disabled people parking on double yellows as they can on street' activities listed should be exempt (not parking events, what do you think?) then please go to the Annexes at the end of the PAS Code and find the one about Exempt Vehicles and state what other activity you think should be added to the exempt list. 

 

4.    Download the PAS itself and start commenting on what you wish to say something about.  Quick links to each section appear on the left of your page. 

 

You don’t have to comment on everything, e.g. you might want to skip the definitions and focus on later sections, and certainly look at the Annex tables at the end that show things like consideration & grace periods and exemptions.

 

5.    Submit comments when you are happy with them. Don’t just ‘SAVE’ and forget!

 

THAT IS HALF THE JOB DONE!

THE MHCLG CONSULTATION IS EASIER AS IT IS JUST A LIST OF QUESTIONS. 

 

6.    You can do it first if preferred or pushed for time:

https://forms.office.com/Pages/ResponsePage.aspx?id=EGg0v32c3kOociSi7zmVqAVPfAOtwRxLhHRwQ610oElUMzhQSVo0WUQ4SERVSEZaUU9DTUhFQ1VMUy4u

If your answers exceed 4000 characters (approx. 500 words to a single question or 16000 words (approx. 2500 words) for all the questions below, you can email your answers to parking@communities.gov.uk as long as you state who you are.

THESE ARE THE QUESTIONS YOU WILL SEE, FOR RESPONSES TO THE FRAMEWORK:

Q1 Do you agree or disagree that members of APAs should be required to use a single appeals service appointed by the Secretary of State?

Strongly agree/Somewhat agree/Neither agree nor disagree/Somewhat disagree/Strongly disagree

 

Q1.1 Please explain your answer

(free text)

 

 

Q2 Please provide any other feedback on the determination of appeals, including the funding model and features that an appeal service should offer e.g. telephone or in-person hearings, the ability to submit evidence online

(free text)

 

Q3 Please provide any comments you have on the proposal to enforce the Code by combining the ATA’s existing audit procedures with additional safeguards.

(free text)

 

Q4 Please outline any alternative means by which the Code could be monitored and enforced. You may wish to cite evidence from other regulatory frameworks which are relevant.

(free text)

 

Q5 Please provide any feedback you have on the proposed governance arrangements for monitoring the new Code of Practice

(free text)

 

Q6 Which parking charge system is most appropriate for private parking?

 a) the Three-tiered system

 b) Mirroring the Local Authority system

(free text)

 

 Q6.1 Please explain your answer. You may, for example, wish to make reference to other deterrent frameworks (for example, for railway tickets or traffic violations)

(free text)

 

 

Q7 What level of discount is appropriate:

40% as is currently offered in private parking and suggested in the three-tiered system, or

50% as is offered in Local Authority parking?

a) 40%

b) 50%

 

Q7.1 Please explain your answer, including whether the discount should be set at a different level

(free text)

 

 

 Q8 How should the level of parking charges be set and how should the levels be revised in future?

(free text)

 

 

Q9 Do you agree or disagree in principle with the idea of the Appeals Charter?

Agree/Disagree

 

Q9.1 Please explain your answer

(free text)

 

 

Q10 Do you agree or not that the examples given in the Appeals Charter are fair and appropriate? Agree/Disagree

 

Q10.1 Please explain your answer.

You may wish, for example, to suggest additional cases to be covered in an Appeals Charter or query existing examples.

(free text)

 

Q11 Do you agree or disagree that the parking industry should contribute towards the cost of the regulation?

Agree/Disagree

 

Q11.1 Please explain your answer.

(free text)

 

YOU CAN INSTEAD GIVE MORE CONCISE ANSWERS ONLINE, USING THE MHCLG PAGE LINK.

Don’t forget that answering these questions is the easier bit…

Looking at the BSI PAS (the draft code of practice itself) involves logging in and submitting comments again, and again and again and takes more time!

There is a discussion about PAS submissions and what the pages look like, here:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6195417/am-i-doing-something-wrong/p1

 

beamerguy

It seems a new wave of silly letters are coming out from CST again.

The typical rubbish is ...
1: They are instructed by another company who DID NOT issue the parking ticket ??
Mostly the phantom claimer is DRP, (mates of CST). 
2: They add an amount above the parking charge

If you have received a letter before claim from CST there is only one reply for you.

1: To provide a contract between you and DRP or any other company if it's not the parking company
2: To confirm their legal authority to add amounts above the parking charge

No doubt, CST are making complete fools of themselves.  To us they are the jokers in the pack.
However, despite their scary rubbish flawed letters, we have yet to see a court case. Probably because they are using "pre action protocol" as an upmarket debt collector letter. 

So come on CST ..... PLACE YOUR BET using a fake claimant ... I reckon it's worth 1000 to 1 in the bookies 

Read our lips CST ..... BE HONEST, this is all mickey mouse stuff

ForumUserOne

I’ve received another letter from CST, it’s exactly the same just with forms this time. They didn’t reply to my email about their previous letter. Is the advice to reply using the forms they’ve sent? I can send pictures of the forms if needed. 

KeithP

ForumUserOne said:

I’ve received another letter from CST, it’s exactly the same just with forms this time. They didn’t reply to my email about their previous letter. Is the advice to reply using the forms they’ve sent? I can send pictures of the forms if needed. 

I'm not going to read your earlier posts to find out what this letter is exactly the same as, but if you have now received a Letter of Claim then react to that as described in the second post of the NEWBIES thread.

Hint: do not use their forms.

beamerguy

ForumUserOne said:

I’ve received another letter from CST, it’s exactly the same just with forms this time. They didn’t reply to my email about their previous letter. Is the advice to reply using the forms they’ve sent? I can send pictures of the forms if needed. 

Are you NOT understanding this scam from CST ???

YOU NEVER COMPLETE FORMS FROM A SCAMMER

What are they saying this time ..... is it still the circus clowns from DRP who is the claimant ?

Coupon-mad

Please can posters just read the NEWBIES thread before posting?

D_P_Dance

Indeed.  We do seem to be receiving a lot of posts where the poster is clueless.  

JohnBeee

Hi All,
i have today received a ‘Letter Before Claim’ from CST acting on behalf of Debt Recovery Plus Acting as agents for Smart Parking Ltd.

i realise advise here is not to ignore PCNs anymore and to appeal them. I’ve had a few over the years that I’ve always ignored and nothing as gone further than the usual letter every 5-6 weeks that come to nothing. 

I’ve never had a ‘Letter Before Claim’ before. So my question is, have I ran out of options or do I still have chance of not receiving a Judgement against me?

I’ve attached the letter along with a ‘Standard Financial Statement’ we’re they request my employment and earnings. Even expect me to list all my outgoings and bills. I’m presuming it’s more scaremongering that I wouldn’t fill out even if it was a requirement.

ive read thru the thread but can’t seem to see the ‘Newbies’ post. Apologies if I’m repeating previous posts 

thanks in advance for any help

John

KeithP

JohnBeee said:

ive read thru the thread but can’t seem to see the ‘Newbies’ post. Apologies if I’m repeating previous posts 

You've read this thread?

Then how did you miss the link to the NEWBIES thread I posted on 1st October?

Coupon-mad

And the posts directly above yours, begging people to read the NEWBIES thread first. Obviously you have NOT run out of options.