DCB Legal & Premier Parking Logistics (Hearing Day 😞)

Snakes_Belly

Snakes_Belly said:

This is the same PPC as the disappearing pound coins. Put six pounds in, ticket states that you have paid £5.00 but issues a ticket for £3.00 (no change).  WW backed off that one.

Just supposing that in the senario above the driver noticed that his ticket was only for three pounds. He would have to buy another ticket for £6.00 making £12.00 in all paid for parking. It's not the only car park managed by WW where this has happened.  

Fruitcake

Snakes_Belly said:

Snakes_Belly said:

This is the same PPC as the disappearing pound coins. Put six pounds in, ticket states that you have paid £5.00 but issues a ticket for £3.00 (no change).  WW backed off that one.

Just supposing that in the senario above the driver noticed that his ticket was only for three pounds. He would have to buy another ticket for £6.00 making £12.00 in all paid for parking. It's not the only car park managed by WW where this has happened.  

At this rate every motorist will need to invest in a body cam as well as a dash cam.

D_P_Dance

A sure fire sanction by Trading Standards and a refund?

Th1nDiesel

Snakes_Belly said:

This is the same PPC as the disappearing pound coins. Put six pounds in, ticket states that you have paid £5.00 but issues a ticket for £3.00 (no change).  WW backed off that one.

I'm still crossing fingers that this gets discontinued at the last minute too, but with just over a week to go, hearing fee paid and bundle issued, it's looking increasingly likely that it will go ahead.

Coupon-mad

Please comment on the government consultation concerning parking charges and complain to your MP about the proposal to allow fake add on debt recovery costs.

Government Consultation re private parking charge levels, August 2021: PLEASE BOOKMARK THIS THREAD — MoneySavingExpert Forum

We are calling for everyone to do a full and robust response by email to the MHCLG, attaching evidence of what happened to you and what you think is wrong about £100 charges and fake debt recovery ‘fees’ that no PPC actually incurs or pays. 

We also need people to contact their MP to ask questions about why the MHCLG appear to have performed a U-turn on their March promise to cap parking charges, and why instead they propose to fund the race to court at £70 a time from victims

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/78517562/#Comment_78517562

To anyone reading this: PLEASE DO THIS IF YOU WANT CONSUMER VOICES TO OUTWEIGH THE PARKING INDUSTRY’S GREED. WHICH SEES THEM TRY TO CLAIM MORE THAN THE LAW ALLOWS, FROM A REGISTERED KEEPER,

I just looked at the POFA Explanatory Notes (part of the legislation):

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/notes/division/5/1/3/3

221.Paragraph 4 provides that the creditor has a right to recover unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the relevant vehicle if the conditions set out in paragraphs 5, 6, 11 and 12 are satisfied. The creditor is not obliged to pursue unpaid parking charges through this scheme and may seek to do so through other means but they may not use the scheme provided for here to secure double recovery of unpaid parking charges (paragraph 4(6)), nor will they have the right to pursue the keeper, as opposed to the driver, of the vehicle where they have sufficient details of the driver’s identity. The right to reclaim unpaid parking charges from the vehicle keeper does not apply in cases where the vehicle has been stolen before it was parked, (paragraphs 4(2) to (3)), or in certain circumstances where the vehicle in question was a hire vehicle (paragraph 4(7)). The creditor may not make a claim against the keeper of a vehicle for more than the amount of the unpaid parking related charges as they stood when the notice to the driver was issued (paragraph 4(5)).

Th1nDiesel

Just had my hearing and I'm frustrated to say that it didn't go well. The judge had basically made his mind up already, and as I stated that I bought a ticket, in his eyes all arguements about contracts were irrelevant. He was also not happy about the fact that I never appealed, or never even contacted the claimant until the LBA. And he basically called my story of fluttering ticket and no PCN !!!!!!, stating that he felt that being doubly unlucky on the same day was unlikely.

Claimant got the full £160 (no interest), so this has just cost me £260 altogether. I'm fuming to be honest, but I'd do it again!

I tried my best to argue my corner, but he wasn't having any if it and I think I'd lost this from the start.

Thanks to all who helped with the defence and WS; much appreciated.

Jenni_D

Sorry to hear that ... such is judge bingo, and this sounds like you got a clueless one.  

Umkomaas

SO sorry to hear this. There's no guarantees, all litigation carries risks - to both parties, there's never a draw!

Could you please tell us the location of the court?

D_P_Dance

Judge bingo will not cut it. in my world.a judge without a clue should become a judge without a job.  If you think that the judge was biaised or acted inappropriately complain here, copying it to your MP..

https://www.gov.uk/complain-judge-magistrate-tribunal-coroner

Also, he appears to have allowed what appears to be an extra unlawful amount for debt coolection. Judges have dismissed an entire claim because this. Read thus,.

Excel v Wilkinson

At the Bradford County Court, District Judge Claire Jackson (now HHJ Jackson, a Specialist Civil Circuit Judge) decided to hear a 'test case' a few months ago, where £60 had been added to a parking charge despite Judges up and down the country repeatedly disallowing that sum and warning parking firms not to waste court time with such spurious claims.   That case was Excel v Wilkinson: G4QZ465V, heard in July 2020 and leave to appeal was refused and that route was not pursued.  The Judge concluded that such claims are proceedings with 'an improper collateral purpose'.   This Judge - and others who have since copied her words and struck dozens of cases out in late 2020 and into 2021 - went into significant detail and concluded that parking operators (such as this Claimant) are seeking to circumvent CPR 27.14 as well as breaching the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   DJ Hickinbottom has recently struck more cases out in that court area, stating: ''I find that striking out this claim is the only appropriate manner in which the disapproval of the court can be shown''.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/16qovzulab1szem/G4QZ465V Excel v Wilkinson.pdf?dl=0

Th1nDiesel

Umkomaas said:

SO sorry to hear this. There's no guarantees, all litigation carries risks - to both parties, there's never a draw!

Could you please tell us the location of the court?

It was Hereford County Court