IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

2017 Capital Car Park Control PCN, DCB Legal now following up

Options
2456789

Comments

  • nosferatu1001
    nosferatu1001 Posts: 12,961 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Third Anniversary Name Dropper
    No declaration of the trading name being just that, no disclosure of the actual legal entity (the sole trader)
  • correct , incorrect info on NTK and other paperwork at the time 

    capitol car park control was not a company listed at companies house , there is no company number or vat number on the NTK 

    to all intents and perposes , just a scam begging letter , from a non existand company 

    the correct wording on the ntk would have been terry towel T/a 
  • No declaration of the trading name being just that, no disclosure of the actual legal entity (the sole trader)
    correct , incorrect info on NTK and other paperwork at the time 

    capitol car park control was not a company listed at companies house , there is no company number or vat number on the NTK 

    to all intents and perposes , just a scam begging letter , from a non existand company 

    the correct wording on the ntk would have been terry towel T/a 

    Agreed. Especially now, as the 'new' Capital Car Park Control Ltd. has the same website, branding, and contact information - So not only at the time, the signage was unable to form a contract (for many reasons), as well as a contract cannot be formed with an unknown entity (Thanks to Castle, I also know that the legislation regarding this is in Section 1206 of the Companies Act 2006).
    For any who are interested, posted my latest draft of my DCB Legal letter on my PePiPoo thread.
  • Figured I'd give the BPA a nudge on this, as this operator clearly does not care for either the law or the BPA's CoP

    Hi,

    I've got 5 PCNs outstanding with Capital Car Park Control dating back to early 2017.

    PCN Numbers: [redacted]

    I appealed all of the above PCNs at the time, however the operator refused the appeal, and also refused to issue a POPLA code.

    I am also aware that the company was also exploiting the use of the BPA database (I am in possession of a letter from Joe Morris which indicates that Capital Car Park Control LTD joined your AOS on 01/02/2010), as the operator was operating as a Sole Trader up until 24th August 2020 (company number 12832321), however signage did not indicate as such, nor did it contain the name Capital Car Park Control Ltd. (which did not exist at the time), which is in direct violation of PoFA (paragraph 7 (2)(e) and paragraph 8 (2)(h)), wherein the creditor must be identified, and in violation of the Companies Act 2006, sections 1205 and 1206 which sets out the guidelines for how to address either companies or sole traders in a manner which allows for a binding contract to be formed.

    The operator is now attempting to pursue this through the courts, however they clearly do not have any standing, and given their refusal to issue POPLA codes, are in violation of your Codes of Practice.

    I seek your help in getting these PCNs dismissed before this goes any further.

    Many thanks
  • you will hit a brick wall the bpa are clueless and have been letting a non company get info from the DVLA the guy is listed as LTD by the BPA , claims to be trading as TA to the dvla 

    does no one at the DVLA or BPA check things out 

  • Jenni_D
    Jenni_D Posts: 5,434 Forumite
    1,000 Posts Fourth Anniversary Name Dropper Photogenic
    edited 5 February 2021 at 5:35PM
    Capital Car Park Control LTD joined your AOS on 01/02/2010
    Is that actually what you meant? I thought the position was that the LTD company didn't join the AOS scheme until 24-Aug-20? Before that it was Terry Towelling T/A blah blah that was an AOS member?

    Edit: I've just seen this post, so I can see where you've got your dates from. I guess the nudge should really be ... how can a company formed on 24-Aug-20 have been a BPA AOS member since 01-Feb-2010? :)
    Jenni x
  • Jenni_D said:
    Capital Car Park Control LTD joined your AOS on 01/02/2010
    Is that actually what you meant? I thought the position was that the LTD company didn't join the AOS scheme until 24-Aug-20? Before that it was Terry Towelling T/A blah blah that was an AOS member?
    Yes, that is what I meant. 
    See the following image, from the horse's mouth - the BPA:


    It clearly states that the LTD company joined 10 years before they even existed!
  • Jenni_D
    Jenni_D Posts: 5,434 Forumite
    1,000 Posts Fourth Anniversary Name Dropper Photogenic
    edited 5 February 2021 at 5:38PM
    I edited my post as you were replying. :)  I think the nudge as you've posted it isn't forceful enough - it doesn't properly convey the discrepancy.
    Jenni x
  • as he had formed a new company and was active , i noted that the BPA did not have 2 entries , relating to terry towel , T/A or Ltd 
     so "assumed" that the T/A was no longer a bpa member and they had substituted the Ltd company in the alphabetical listing 
    the question was simple and to the point

    "when did Terry SZMIDT T/A capitol carpark patrol cease to be a member of the BPA AOS , and secondly 

    when did Capitol carpark patrol LIMITED become a member 

    thank you XX XXX

    and the reply as pasted above was "thank you for your email.

     Ican confirm that Capital Car Park Control Ltd joined our Approved Operator Scheme on 01/02/2010. They have been members ever since this date.


    this is plainly only half an answer , and in fact the part they did address seems to be incorrect 


    perhaps a fob off email , or perhaps the question was to hard for them 





  • Jenni_D said:
    I edited my post as you were replying. :)  I think the nudge as you've posted it isn't forceful enough - it doesn't properly convey the discrepancy.
    I've already sent it, but when they reply I'll make my point crystal clear. I've got extra ammo beyond that too, but I think what I've sent gives a little bit of insight as to the crooked operation of this company.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.7K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 599.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177K Life & Family
  • 257.6K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.