UKPS - pcn for parking

amz1909

Hi All,
Read all the info on the newbie thread but have few question/queries/confusion as this is UKPS. 
UKPS gave the PCN to me as a keeper. few weeks back. 
contravention permit not displayed
plan of action.
1. plan a - Send the letter to landowner. 
issue: it is a college and have info email id. but worth the try.

2. appeal to UKPS with the format in the newbie thread.
- question: i read on ukps threads not to bother appeal as well..so should i appeal online or not ? 

trying to convince my other half not to be scared and pay up..which is difficult  

thanks in advance and this is awesome form... 

Coupon-mad

I think send the first appeal as keeper but if this is the IPC AOS firm UKPS, ignore them & the daft £170 debt demands, after that if the landowner won't step in to cancel.

amz1909

Coupon-mad said:

I think send the first appeal as keeper but if this is the IPC AOS firm UKPS, ignore them & the daft £170 debt demands, after that if the landowner won't step in to cancel.

Thanks, complaint to the landowner.. It is Guildford college and the email is via some active learning who manages multiple colleges.. 

Yes it is ipc ukps... 
Sorry didn't get the last line.. After that if landowner won't step in to cancel... 
Then do the first appeal? 

Gr1pr

Landowner first 

Appeal as keeper before the deadline, especially if its not cancelled 

Ignore debt collectors letters or threats, debt collectors are powerless, only UKPS or their legal company can issue a court claim 

Fruitcake

1) Landowner complaint
2) If 1 fails, appeal to UKPS as per the template in the NEWBIES
3) Ignore everything thereafter except a letter of/before claim or a court claim

Also, get photos of the site and signage asap. Have a look at Google Streetview to see if there are any useful images there.

amz1909

1.thanks all, did the landowner complaint ... they responded some other department and asked below

Please ensure you have followed the appeal process with UKPS on the back of the ticket, our facilities team will be in touch with you shortly.

2. should i appeal or wait for the other department to come back ?

3. have the photos of the site and the location is next to children park .. stoke park in guildford.. confusing from the round about entry exit.. will post it here for more details 

Gr1pr

I would suggest that you do both, without naming the driver 

amz1909

Gr1pr said:

I would suggest that you do both, without naming the driver 

Thanks using the below template as it is and doing it ... 
Re PCN number:

I dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. Since your PCN is a vague template, I require an explanation of the allegation and your evidence. You must include a close up actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date as well as your images of the vehicle.

If the allegation concerns a PDT machine, the data supplied in response to this appeal must include the record of payments made - showing partial VRNs - and an explanation of the reason for the PCN, because your Notice does not explain it.

If the allegation involves an alleged overstay of minutes, your evidence must include the actual grace period agreed by the landowner.


THE NAME AND POSTAL ADDRESS OF THE KEEPER (OR THE HIRER/LESSEE) GOES HERE, OR IN THE RELEVANT BOX ON THEIR APPEALS PAGE.

THE DRIVER IS NOT IDENTIFIED.

amz1909

Coupon-mad said:

I think send the first appeal as keeper but if this is the IPC AOS firm UKPS, ignore them & the daft £170 debt demands, after that if the landowner won't step in to cancel.

land owners facilities management company have declined to cancel the pcn.. with below wording.. that is a bit of a rude way .. 
"Guildford Borough Council clearly states on its web site when the car park is accessible for the public.  UKPS is given authority to manage our car park at Stoke Park for these reasons (unauthorised use).  Please be aware this PCN will NOT be cancelled, and UKPS have full authority to manage our car park. "

This will definitely go to media and negative publicity as it is a college.. Any ways or methods or doing pls ? 

amz1909

Response to appeal from UKPS : 

"
It is only human nature when faced with a parking charge notice to seek advice online for a way to avoid payment, however the information received is usually incorrect and serves to do nothing more than waste the reader’s time. The car park in which the vehicle had been parked operates as a permit holder only car park. There are clear signs informing all drivers they must have a valid permit registered to the vehicle to park on this site. It is the drivers sole responsibility to ensure they are familiarising themselves with the signs and adhering to the terms and conditions stated within them.

The contract that UKPS Limited has with the owner or occupier of the land (which authorises UKPS Limited to enter into a contract with the driver requiring the payment of Parking Charges in respect of parking of the vehicle on the land) contains a confidentiality clause and as such we are not in a position to provide the contract to you.

As a member of the Approved Operator Scheme, UKPS Limited are audited by the IPC to ensure that we have all relevant contracts in place. UKPS Limited will provide the court with a copy of this in full if they require it, or can provide a written statement to this effect from those party to the contract. We are also more than happy to provide confirmation to the independent assessors that we are authorised to manage parking at this site. We can confirm that parking management at this site has been contracted to UKPS Limited.

All of our signage is fully compliant with the guidelines set out within the IPC Code of Practice and we reject the notion that it is in any way unclear or ambiguous. The signage is printed on reflective material and is clearly illuminated in vehicle headlights within hours of darkness.

The highest court in the UK, the Supreme Court, has unambiguously confirmed that parking charges issued on private land are fully enforceable. In the case of Parking Eye v Beavis (2015) UKSC 67 their Lordships stated that private parking charges were enforceable because they served a legitimate interest and were in the interests of the public generally. The case confirmed that the amount of the charge does not have to reflect any loss that might have been caused by breach of the terms and conditions of parking.

The Supreme Court decision is binding law on all other courts throughout the UK.

Another Court decision: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-39478203

We appreciate that this is not the outcome you will have hoped for, however this decision is final.

If you are not happy with our decision, you can contact the IAS (www.theias.org) standard Appeals service within 21 days of this appeal being declined. Please note that should you choose to appeal with the IAS and they dismiss your appeal, you will no longer have the option to pay the reduced amount of £60.00 and will be required to pay the full amount of £100.00.

If you choose to do nothing, after 56 days from the incident date, the parking charge will be passed to our debt recovery agent, at which point you will be liable to pay an additional charge of £60, in accordance with our terms and conditions of parking and further charges will be claimed if Court action is taken against you. Any unpaid Court Judgement may adversely affect your credit rating.

PLEASE DO NOT IGNORE THIS LETTER. UKPS LIMITED REGULARLY TAKES MOTORISTS TO COURT WHO IGNORE THEIR PARKING CHARGES.

Zbubuman

Not a surprise that the declined the appeal. Now just sit an wait and come back here when you receive the letter before claim.  Anything other debt collection letters asking for £170, etc. You can safely file and ignore. 

Love it how they mention this "It is only human nature when faced with a parking charge notice to seek advice online for a way to avoid payment, however the information received is usually incorrect and serves to do nothing more than waste the reader’s time."  Is it because 99.99% we manage to beat the Sh*t out of you, and we are a massive thorn in your side?