DCBL letters ..... forum group thread

Umkomaas

Parking firms can't just pitch up on any old car park and start issuing tickets/charges. They are most certainly required to have the written permission of the landowner. 

beamerguy

UKPC is however authorised to provide parking management and to issue parking charge notices to vehicles breaching the terms of parking, in accordance with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

But UKPC are refusing to prove this to you.  The parking sign shows they are not POFA compliant nor is the sign BPA compliant

Who do you think is lying ?  the landowner, the restaurant or UKPC

Two companies are saying there is no contract and only one is saying there is ?

I would tell the landowner that UKPC says they have a contract and as the matter can only be resolved in court, you will call the landowner as your witness

SM1709

So, they sent my SAR through with about a million photos of my car, including inside??🧐
there is also a photo of a parking board that isn’t there now, so could be any old board? There’s no proof that it’s in the car park I was parked in. I’ve attached the photo of the sign, obviously if I had seen that, I wouldn’t have Parked there (even though I was told I could by the restaurant 🤨) do I still stand a good chance of fighting this with UKPC. They don’t seem to be budging 😭

Umkomaas

I'm not sure I'd trust any UKPC photo with a time/date stamp on it!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3229165/Is-PROOF-private-parking-firms-scamming-motorists-Drivers-say-timings-photos-doctored-legally-parked-cars-issued-fines.html

beamerguy

That sign is not compliant ..... yes, it could be anywhere, they need to prove it was in the actuall car park ..... given the UKPC fraudulent attempt on timestamps what is their proof ?

The landowner and restaurant have stated they have not contracted UKPC

Now, you have a claim via DCBL who have added fake amounts.   Where on that sign does it mention add-ons ????   

At the moment, UKPC will not budge, they prefer to provide signs without proof and decline to prove their authority when the landowner and restaurant say there is none.

I would say that a court will kick out such a fake claim and there is every chance that the DVLA will ban them from their data base for the third time ?  That should be final and the end for UKPC 

As far as DCBL, they take on cases they don't have a clue about and that is a serious report to the SRA.   Even if DCBL pull out, the SRA complaint must still be made.

Don't give up on this, lies are being told

Cheesyavacado87

SM1709 said:

So, they sent my SAR through with about a million photos of my car, including inside??🧐
there is also a photo of a parking board that isn’t there now, so could be any old board? There’s no proof that it’s in the car park I was parked in. I’ve attached the photo of the sign, obviously if I had seen that, I wouldn’t have Parked there (even though I was told I could by the restaurant 🤨) do I still stand a good chance of fighting this with UKPC. They don’t seem to be budging 😭

After being served with several “charges” I now have a personal vendetta against UKPC.

Doesn’t a charge have to meet the requirements of a pre-estimated loss set out by the Office of fair trading (OFT)? This has to be a direct result of your “breach of contract”. This doesn’t take into account their office cost, staff, etc. 

Maybe I’m wrong, but hopefully someone will correct me if I am. 

Coupon-mad

No, it doesn't...yawn...that's over five years out of date for parking cases.  Read the ParkingEye v Beavis case and wait for your claim form.  You'll win.

Cheesyavacado87

Standard sarcastic reply 

Coupon-mad

Sorry but if that was a thing it would be in the NEWBIES thread and it was removed over 5 years ago, after the Supreme Court had a brain fart and caused the current race to court, by their anti-consumer decision.  

pustit

Supreme Court had a brain fart and caused the current race to court, by their anti-consumer decision. 
 +1