Appeal is being ignored

Midgit

I received a PCN from Total Parking Solutions that said I was observed leaving a store's car park while the vehicle was parked there. That part is true, I went to the post office which is literally next door, was no more than 5 minutes and then went into the actual store. I challenged the ticket on that basis. I heard nothing so after 2 weeks, emailed TPS and they acknowledged receipt of my complaint, but I heard nothing further until l received a final demand which stated that the time to appeal had expired. I emailed them again to advise I had received no outcome from my appeal. They then passed my case to ZZPS to pursue, so I emailed them, TPS and raised a complaint with the BPA for breach of multiple named clauses. TPS & BPA responded with case references, but ZZPS have now sent a letter stating they are passing the file to enforcement agents. I have spoken to an unhelpful individual there who stated that they don't put cases on hold while complaints are investigated. Am I correct in thinking that they can't instruct enforcement agents without a court issued warrant? Can anyone advise where I actually stand legally on this please? TIA

Jame4ters

Don’t contact TPS or ZZPS

Don’t pay anything.

There are numerous examples similar to yours on these threads. Nobody has had to pay yet

Coupon-mad

"TPS & BPA responded with case references, but ZZPS have now sent a letter stating they are passing the file to enforcement agents.

I have spoken to an unhelpful individual there who stated that they don't put cases on hold while complaints are investigated."

Typical ZZPS.

That's against the CONC rules which the proper statutory Code will reference, but I don't think the joke self-serving industry 'Joint Code' does.

Please show us that letter threatening enforcement agents (aka bailiffs).

Midgit

Letter as requested

Coupon-mad

Thanks!

As usual, ZZPS are:

• using the Beavis case out of context to dupe people into thinking that all private parking charges are enforceable (which is a lie) and
• twice referring to their sister firm GCTT by its full name, again I'd say that's designed to make scared recipients Google 'certified enforcement agents' (which is the new name for bailiffs) and put two and two together & make five.

These look to be misleading statements. Thankyou, I will show this to the MHCLG.

You are quite right. Now there is a ZZPS arm called GCTT but in this case they are not acting as bailiffs and that should be made clear.

Without a writ or warrant of control - only after taking a case to court and getting a CCJ first, then you refusing to pay what the court ordered - there are no bailiffs.

Midgit

Thank you folks. That had me spinning out a bit!

Car1980

Amazing how Deborah Tomes' fake signature font is identical to Moorside Legal's sign-offs 🤣