On duty NHS community Nurse

Coupon-mad

Dear xxxx,

No thanks, I won't contact the likes of PCM.   Ex-wheelclampers like the ones you have astonishingly got into bed with, don't actually have a fair 'appeals team'.  No appeals are allowed which is why this market is being changed by Government intervention.

My goodness your firm is gullible if you think PCM fairly consider appeals!  Here they are on Watchdog's Rogue Traders, admitting they 'make it up most of the time':
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2015/05/is-it-pcm-uk-who-make-up-stuff-all-time.html?m=1

Thankfully, the Government isn't so naive and is acting in the interests of consumers; this exact 'permit not displayed' rubbish will be stopped within months:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/private-parking-code-of-practice/private-parking-code-of-practice

The new rules within the incoming statutory Code are no longer 'withdrawn' and are now being finalised to stamp out rogue practice, e.g.

"F3 'appeals':
In considering appeals parking operators must recognise the following as mitigating circumstances warranting cancellation of a parking charge, subject to evidence being provided:

d) where a permit to park has not been displayed but the driver subsequently supplies a copy of the permit they hold that would have been valid at the time identified in the notice of parking charge;"

Did PCM bother to tell you (or are they hiding the information) that their industry is currently being assessed for what the Government calls 'market failure' and 'extorting money from motorists'?

Are you content that your agents are ignoring that clause (published 18 months ago) despite it not being part of the parking industry challenge that temporarily blocked the new Code?

The 'appeals clauses' will be statutory - they remain unchallenged and won't change - and are based on fair treatment of motorists and addressing the worst excesses of a market failure crisis.

Still content to prop them up?

You might wish to show the above to your lawyers because you are going to have to change your stance.  If you perpetuate myths fed to you by a notorious wheelclamper, you could be guilty of an offence under the CPUTRs (misleading omissions/actions and being liable for the actions of an agent purporting to operate under a Code of Practice when apparently not doing so).

If in doubt, do seek legal advice.  I suggest you revisit your stance and who you are operating with, given the law changes coming in.

Do not tell me that the new statutory Code isn't actually in force yet - I know that!

But the Consumer Rights Act and the CPUTRs 2008 (which the 'appeals' and 'fairness' aspects of the code relies upon) are in force.  As is the Equality Act 2010 which protects people (including my patient I was visiting) and their carers.

 This is nothing new and, for the most part, the new DLUHC Code merely states the lawful consumer protection position that the existing self-serving Codes have failed to address.

Could you tell me who to address court papers to, if I counterclaim and add your company in to respond? There was no 'reasonable cause' for PCM to get my DVLA data and no lawful justification to continue to process my data, knowing from the Council NHS permit that I was on duty, visiting a patient.

You are reminded that you remain jointly and severally liable for the actions of your agents.  Choose wisely when replacing PCM, because plenty of the more rogue operators will fail.

Do you really want to stand by with your fingers in your ears, and let a firm like PCM drag me and you to court?  Does your company want to inflict this misery onto an on-duty, permitted NHS Nurse such that my team has to boycott your estate and leave patients in the lurch?

Yours sincerely,

 

Xxxx

AW

Thank you so much just got home from work to a letter saying they will pass my details to a debt management company 

Coupon-mad

AW said:

Thank you so much just got home from work to a letter saying they will pass my details to a debt management company 

Which is fine because you will IGNORE THAT ENTIRELY - but the letter can be attached to the above complaint, to show the managing agents what is being inflicted on you.

Attach it and add a line saying how horrified you are that they are involved with this legalised thuggery.
 
Use my wording... you could change the start by pointing out that it is too late to go through the appeal farce anyway as the attached threat has arrived.

AW

The lovely letter

AW

Coupon-mad said:

Dear xxxx,

No thanks, I won't contact the likes of PCM.   Ex-wheelclampers like the ones you have astonishingly got into bed with, don't actually have a fair 'appeals team'.  No appeals are allowed which is why this market is being changed by Government intervention.

My goodness your firm is gullible if you think PCM fairly consider appeals!  Here they are on Watchdog's Rogue Traders, admitting they 'make it up most of the time':
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2015/05/is-it-pcm-uk-who-make-up-stuff-all-time.html?m=1

Thankfully, the Government isn't so naive and is acting in the interests of consumers; this exact 'permit not displayed' rubbish will be stopped within months:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/private-parking-code-of-practice/private-parking-code-of-practice

The new rules within the incoming statutory Code are no longer 'withdrawn' and are now being finalised to stamp out rogue practice, e.g.

"F3 'appeals':
In considering appeals parking operators must recognise the following as mitigating circumstances warranting cancellation of a parking charge, subject to evidence being provided:

d) where a permit to park has not been displayed but the driver subsequently supplies a copy of the permit they hold that would have been valid at the time identified in the notice of parking charge;"

Did PCM bother to tell you (or are they hiding the information) that their industry is currently being assessed for what the Government calls 'market failure' and 'extorting money from motorists'?

Are you content that your agents are ignoring that clause (published 18 months ago) despite it not being part of the parking industry challenge that temporarily blocked the new Code?

The 'appeals clauses' will be statutory - they remain unchallenged and won't change - and are based on fair treatment of motorists and addressing the worst excesses of a market failure crisis.

Still content to prop them up?

You might wish to show the above to your lawyers because you are going to have to change your stance.  If you perpetuate myths fed to you by a notorious wheelclamper, you could be guilty of an offence under the CPUTRs (misleading omissions/actions and being liable for the actions of an agent purporting to operate under a Code of Practice when apparently not doing so).

If in doubt, do seek legal advice.  I suggest you revisit your stance and who you are operating with, given the law changes coming in.

Do not tell me that the new statutory Code isn't actually in force yet - I know that!

But the Consumer Rights Act and the CPUTRs 2008 (which the 'appeals' and 'fairness' aspects of the code relies upon) are in force.  As is the Equality Act 2010 which protects people (including my patient I was visiting) and their carers.

 This is nothing new and, for the most part, the new DLUHC Code merely states the lawful consumer protection position that the existing self-serving Codes have failed to address.

Could you tell me who to address court papers to, if I counterclaim and add your company in to respond? There was no 'reasonable cause' for PCM to get my DVLA data and no lawful justification to continue to process my data, knowing from the Council NHS permit that I was on duty, visiting a patient.

You are reminded that you remain jointly and severally liable for the actions of your agents.  Choose wisely when replacing PCM, because plenty of the more rogue operators will fail.

Do you really want to stand by with your fingers in your ears, and let a firm like PCM drag me and you to court?  Does your company want to inflict this misery onto an on-duty, permitted NHS Nurse such that my team has to boycott your estate and leave patients in the lurch?

Yours sincerely,

 

Xxxx

This is amazing Chuckle while reading 😄

AW

Coupon-mad said:

AW said:

Thank you so much just got home from work to a letter saying they will pass my details to a debt management company 

Which is fine because you will IGNORE THAT ENTIRELY - but the letter can be attached to the above complaint, to show the managing agents what is being inflicted on you.

Attach it and add a line saying how horrified you are that they are involved with this legalised thuggery.
 
Use my wording... you could change the start by pointing out that it is too late to go through the appeal farce anyway as the attached threat has arrived.

I can see why people pay with the wording of the letter, I will keep fighting however, can't stand bullies!  

AW

Letter sent
Thank you 😊 

AW

Below was the reply I received today. It appears they have not read it fully as they have not supplied their solicitor details as requested.
.

Thank you for your emails and we are sorry to hear you have received a ticket.

 

Unfortunately, there is little we can do – As advised by my colleague,  you will need to contend this with PCM.

 

Kind regards

Coupon-mad

AW said:

Below was the reply I received today. It appears they have not read it fully as they have not supplied their solicitor details as requested.
.

Thank you for your emails and we are sorry to hear you have received a ticket.

 

Unfortunately, there is little we can do – As advised by my colleague,  you will need to contend this with PCM.

 

Kind regards

Dear xxxxx

I take it from your curt reply that you haven't referred this for any legal advice and you are happy to be named personally to be called as a witness when PCM sue me.  I clearly asked.

You failed to nominate anyone else so I have to take it that you read my email and accept joint and several liability on behalf of your company.

You must have a lot of faith in your ex-wheelclampers.  It is disappointing that you continue to support an agent that was outed on Watchdog and has appalling reviews from victims.  When you start looking for a new firm,  I suggest next time, you Google them first.

Yours sincerely,

AW

Just sent it, thank you