Euro Car Park / Debt Recovery plus PCN - Please help

Borolad09

Good afternoon,

Looking for some general help and i have spent some time reading the newbie sections and looking at previous posts and getting a tad mixed up.

My wife received a PCN from overstaying at a shopping centre car park (advised took longer with appointment and didnt realise the time) - POSTCODE ts17 9ff
She did not read the signs and assumed it was a free stay car park and was there approximately 4 hours, 1 hour over the free amount.

This car park is NEVER full.

Sign below, there are a few in the car park but not really obvious.

We received two letters from euro car parks including pictures of our car from an anpr camera that we ignored as an oversight and yesterday received the below.

Firstly is there a way to not pay or to reduce this or are we banged to rights and should pay the debt recovery plus to put this matter to bed and not make the situation worse?

We have not made contact with either euro car parks or debt recovery plus.





[Some images removed by Forum Team]

D_P_Dance

You owe nothing unless a judge says you do.  it is a scam

Have you read the newbies, they  clearly tell you to ignore begging letters from DCAs.  Have you complained to your MP?  

The DCA  has added what appears to be an extra unlawful amount of £70  for debt collection.

This amounts to double recovery and Judges all over the country are dismissing these spurious additions. Indeed some judges have dismissed entire claims because of this. Read this and complain to Trading Standards and your MP,

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

However, VCS appealed this so it may not apply in all cases, read this

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ntksx9g7177ahyg/VCS v Percy v1 Amendments (2).pdf?dl=0Also read this

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6279348/witness-statements-2-transcripts-re-parking-firms-false-costs-recorder-cohen-qc-judgment-2021/p1

Also this,

"Abuse of process – the quantum

13. In addition to the disputed Parking Charge Notice claim amount of £100, the Claimant has added a sum of £60 that is disingenuously described variously as 'debt collection costs', ‘additional charges levied to cover the cost of recovery’, ‘additional administration costs’, ‘debt recovery costs’, ‘initial legal costs’ and ‘recovery costs’. The added £60 constitutes double recovery and the court is invited to find the quantum claimed is false and an abuse of process as was found by District Judge Claire Jackson (now HHJ Jackson, a Specialist Civil Circuit Judge) in Excel vs Wilkinson: G4QZ465V, a similar case in which £60 had been added to a parking charge, heard in July 2020 (the transcript of which is exhibit XX-04). The Judge concluded that such claims are proceedings with 'an improper collateral purpose'. Leave to appeal was refused and that route was not pursued."

patient_dream

The FIRST thing you do is delete the DRP image as it shows your private information

Please redact your private information and upload again

Borolad09

patient_dream said:

The FIRST thing you do is delete the DRP image as it shows your private information

Please redact your private information and upload again

I am unable to delete, only noticed after posted

KeithP

Letters from Debt Recovery Plus are simply debt collectors letters.

The fourth post of the NEWBIES thread tells you exactly how to deal with debt collectors letters, but to summarise that post - ignore them.

At this stage your best action - or rather, your wife's best action - is to complain to the shopping centre. Get them to cancel the ticket.

patient_dream

Borolad09 said:

patient_dream said:

The FIRST thing you do is delete the DRP image as it shows your private information

Please redact your private information and upload again

I am unable to delete, only noticed after posted

OK, well contact MSE and ask them to delete the DRP file

In the meantime, what you should know about DRP

DRP are the Pinocchio of the parking industry and their nose grows longer every day with lie after lie.

That letter is straight out of playschool with their little drawings and that picture of the collections manager is probably a fake .... what sort of fool would allow themselves to be seen spouting such utter scam rubbish

You do not owe £170 .... it's a DRP scam.  TOTALLY IGNORE THIS RUBBISH ...... it's not even worth the rubbish tip ?

AND THIS RUBBISH GETS WORSE 

THE RESULTS OF YOUR CASE ... Analysis
What fools, there is no case until a legal decides to take it to court

MONITORING IS NOW LIVE ?
Who do these idiots think they are .... BIRDWATCH ?   UTTER RUBBISH

THE SUPREME COURT RULING
This was Beavis v Parking Eye.    The Supreme Court ruled that the parking charge was set to include collection
DRP clearly decided the Supreme Court was wrong and add fake charges.

How to avoid charges increasing ?
The charge cannot increase.  If a legal takes you to court there are set fees around £75 which of course you don't pay when you win

All in all, the DRP letter is complete rubbish as they are a POWERLESS bunch withh 100% NO CLOUT WHO LIE

The new code of practice BANS THE FAKE ADD-ONS

DRP are members of the BPA and that is the problem.  The BPA have lost control of their members and it's the likes of DRP that the new code of practice is about .... Simply put .... Government does not like scammers

Whilst you are safe to ignore dreamers and idiots like DRP, please forward that letter to your MP to investigate and ask the BPA why they allow their member to send out ... TRASH AND RUBBISH only fit for the sewer

Fruitcake

Immediately, you should click on the ! button to report your own post, then select, post contains personal information before firing it off.

Then as a back up, send a pm to the board guides (soolin or savvy) and ask them to delete the images.