PCN from NPM

Scapegoat1

HI guys I am seeking some advice.
I have spent three months reading the Threads and I must say I am struggling to understand. 

A couple of questions I would like some clarification on,

1: I came across a subject regarding dater protection? not sure if that's the right terminology to use? it was regarding the cameras that parking management use on privet land to retrieve peoples number plates and evidence of the alleged breach of contacts.
does a parking management company have to inform members of the public that cameras are in operation? The cameras they use do record outside of the land and on to the public footpath and no signs was present to inform any one of this. ( I was just wondering if I could use that against them or not?) 
2:. I did email NPM  stating, I kindly refuse to pay your invoice for the sum of £70 if paid within 14 days and £100 if not. I explained I had not breached any contact as I did not enter any contact due to insufficient signed post. I refer them to the IPC code of conduct regarding signpost and that singe post must be on an entrance to the managed land  ( There was non)
Their response was that I was referring to the new code of conduct that had not yet been implemented at the time of the "offence". 

I corrected them and stated I was referring to the old code of conduct that was in place at the time of the "offence"
They then stated that singe post upon entrance only applied to carparking that operates a pay and display system.
I corrected them again and the next argument they presented was that signs are advised on entrance but not essential.

I then told them they had still breached the code of conduct  and that the PCN was invalid due to a  insufficient  number of singe post in and around the carpark. 

I was not aware the land was monitored or the stipulations of the carpark as I genuinely did not see any singes on the entrance or in the carpark. It was only after received the PCN and the photo on the letter that I could see what appears to be a singe on a pole next to my drivers side of the car. I could not see the singe clearly in the pictures to tell what singe it was or what it sed. 

I requested they send me proof they have not breached the IPC code of conduct and send me evidence of the singes they had in the car park. they send me photographic evidence of singes on the building and in the same place as shown on my PCN (3 in total) these images was time stamp Sept 2023 my PCN was time stamped June 2024.
 I made them aware the evidence was out of date but they was adamant they have not breached the code of conduct and insisted I still owe the invoice. 
I sent them photographic evidence time stamped the date of the "offence showing no singes on the building. and when I went back to the carpark even the singe that was shown on my PCN has gone. 
The stipulation stated I can not park and leave the carpark ( according to the PCN). The salon I was visiting and who issued the PCN was closed with the shutters down so I would have not seen a sine (assume there was one) and the post office next door had no Singe ( I have time stamped photographic evidence) I did leave the carpark on foot to ask the take away next door if they knew why the salon was closed? they sed it had been shut down for quite some time now. 

I have tried to reach the salon to request the PCN be squashed but as they have been closed way before the PCN was issued I have not been able to contact them.
I have also contacted my local MP to inform them I believe NPM are using entrapment to exploit members of the public out of money. 
The responses was to appeal following the appeals procedure ( so not much help there)  

since then I have Received 4x dept collection letters from ZZps that I have ignore and awaiting solicitors letter. 
I would just like some advice if I have a strong enough argument to win this and any advice on how to win this would be great so I can plan my response to the solicitors and potentially my defence should this be taken to court. 

I have since been put on medication for depression and anxiety due to the effects this has had on my mental health ( not sure if I can also use that in my defence or not).

LDast

You don’t pay these scammers. Just wait and see if they send a Letter of Claim (LoC) and if/when they do, respond with the template in the second post of the Newbies/FAQ thread.

Le_Kirk

I am sure loads of motorists would love to set fire to the signs and turn them into singes! The correct word is signpost or sign (for one) and signposts or signs (for two or more).  But you did make me smile

Scapegoat1

@Le_Kirk thank you so much for my grammar lesson unfortunately I am dyslexic ( as am sure you prob assumed). 

Scapegoat1

@Le_Kirk But a grammar lesson is not the reason for my post. 

Le_Kirk

When you send your defence (and later your witness statement) the judge will read it for what it is and will ask him or herself what are these singes?  Therefore it is important to get it right and if we can help you to overcome the parking companies and win for you and a couple of grammar/spelling lessons help, then so be it.  You are, of course, welcome to ignore my advice.

Thorndorise

@Scapegoat1

Firstly - chill, these are horrible people out to get your money and not be reasonable.

Based on personal experience you will sadly not get very far with a private parking company (PPC) sharing anything with you to dispel their claims you parked on the land they 'manage' in breach of any T&Cs.

I have previously complained to the IPC about the conduct of a PPC insofar as breaching the Code of Practice about entrance signs, they honestly couldn't give a monkey's. They actually told me it was not compulsory (something I strongly disagree with given the wording of the Code). The 'new' single Code of Practice (more self-serving rubbish) is a little stronger, but will likely not apply in this instance presently.

I can also tell you that I followed this same complaint up with the PPC I was dealing with, and they (unsurprisingly) couldn't give a monkey's either....I even sent them the pics of the entrance with no signs, and their answer was different to the IPC, but also kind of the same. They told be that they had been audited by the IPC and that all their signs we in line with the Code.

Neither the IPC nor the PPC would share a redacted audit - they are not there to help you, the motorist, they are there to make money - simple as....they couldn't care less if there are no signs etc.

To your point about ANPR, slightly different I think. I'd love for the more experienced to help here, but I see a lot of signs talking about ANPR when in actual fact they seem to be using CCTV or MNPR cameras, both of the latter requiring some manual recording of entry/exit etc. 

I believe that those latter cameras (and possibly even ANPR too) require notices in place as per ICO guidance as they will be capturing vehicle regs (VRMs/VRNs) which are deemed personal data - as they can be used to identify a person (e.g. via DVLA) 

My advice, await the court claim, defend with the knowledge you clearly have - do heed @Le_Kirk
's advice as they are trying to help you make the most coherent argument you can.

Good luck, keep us posted

Coupon-mad

Scapegoat1 said:

HI guys I am seeking some advice.

...

 I have Received 4x dept collection letters from ZZps that I have ignore and awaiting solicitors letter. 
I would just like some advice if I have a strong enough argument to win this and any advice on how to win this would be great so I can plan my response to the solicitors and potentially my defence should this be taken to court. 

Yes you do have a case but you don't need to plan any replies.

Carry on ignoring ZZPS and GCTT.

Come back if you get a LBC or court claim from a solicitor, but you will be using our templates, so no planning needed.

Scapegoat1

@Thorndorise thank you for your response. Yes I had the same problem the IPC sed they don't believe the NPM have breached any code of conduct? Can't understand why as the code of conduct states multiple singes in and around the land should be present (there was not) so how is that not a beach of conduct? 

So basically any one can buy some land and trap people in to entering that land and then make thousands of pounds a year of innocent victims?  

When is this actually going to be come a crime todo such a thing? It infuriates me. 

Scapegoat1

@Coupon-mad thank you for your response. I am just trying to get everything prepared so I can be prepared for my case. 

I have read a template ( not sure if it's the right one) but i just sed something about denying being the driver and requesting dater to be removed from the system. (Something along those lines). 

Would that be the right response or do I need to explain why I am not liable due to there being a lack of singes in accordance to the IPC code of conduct?  Also just a-bit worried about using templates as I have red that solicitors are aware people are using these templates and disregarding them? 

I do apologise for my grammar. 

Scapegoat1

@Le_Kirk. Yes I appreciate that thank you.