Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • JBlackmore
    • By JBlackmore 10th Dec 16, 1:41 PM
    • 14Posts
    • 1Thanks
    JBlackmore
    DRP & NApier
    • #1
    • 10th Dec 16, 1:41 PM
    DRP & NApier 10th Dec 16 at 1:41 PM
    Need help re: DRP & Napier Parking letters.

    Received Napier parking PCN which I contested by explaining that our engineer was attending a gas leak but they have rejected it and are now sending debt recovery letters from DRP.

    I would attache links to this thread but as im a new user it wont allow me
Page 1
    • pogofish
    • By pogofish 10th Dec 16, 2:38 PM
    • 8,625 Posts
    • 8,960 Thanks
    pogofish
    • #2
    • 10th Dec 16, 2:38 PM
    • #2
    • 10th Dec 16, 2:38 PM
    Post four of the Newbies Sticky will inform you fully.

    Don't waste any time or worry over DRP.
    Last edited by pogofish; 10-12-2016 at 2:40 PM.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 10th Dec 16, 2:56 PM
    • 58,434 Posts
    • 71,937 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #3
    • 10th Dec 16, 2:56 PM
    • #3
    • 10th Dec 16, 2:56 PM
    We don't need to see those letters thanks, read this and ignore anything except a real court claim or LBCCC from Napier, or MIL Collections, or a solicitor:

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5035663

    We've seen enough DRP letters to paper Buckingham Palace! Ignore them completely. No they cannot impose a CCJ or affect your credit record.

    If you are a company firm and you appealed immediately in the company name to a windscreen PCN, can you tell us, did Napier send the company a 'Notice to Keeper'?

    Also which location was this, somewhere in Worthing, or Milton Keynes, or where?

    And if the driver was attending a gas leak called by the site landowner, complain on headed notepaper to the landowner to cancel it immediately. Napier are only the agents of the landowner and have to jump if you can get the landowner to say 'jump'!
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • JBlackmore
    • By JBlackmore 18th Jan 17, 11:54 AM
    • 14 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    JBlackmore
    • #4
    • 18th Jan 17, 11:54 AM
    • #4
    • 18th Jan 17, 11:54 AM
    We appealed immediately upon receipht od the Notice to keeper but we did not receive a PCN even though the photos Napier sent you can see a yellow baggy attached to the windscreen of our can.

    The location is in Hendon NW9

    The job was for a private customer and not a landlord.
    • pogofish
    • By pogofish 18th Jan 17, 11:58 AM
    • 8,625 Posts
    • 8,960 Thanks
    pogofish
    • #5
    • 18th Jan 17, 11:58 AM
    • #5
    • 18th Jan 17, 11:58 AM
    Have you read post four yet?

    Don't worry about DRP toilet paper!
    • safarmuk
    • By safarmuk 18th Jan 17, 12:21 PM
    • 625 Posts
    • 1,149 Thanks
    safarmuk
    • #6
    • 18th Jan 17, 12:21 PM
    • #6
    • 18th Jan 17, 12:21 PM
    What is on the land and who were you visiting - was it a block of flats and a tenant?

    If so then you should escalate to the Management Company and the Freeholder. I doubt either would agree that someone attending a call out for a suspected gas leak should be penalised like this.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 18th Jan 17, 1:47 PM
    • 58,434 Posts
    • 71,937 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #7
    • 18th Jan 17, 1:47 PM
    • #7
    • 18th Jan 17, 1:47 PM
    We appealed immediately upon receipht od the Notice to keeper but we did not receive a PCN even though the photos Napier sent you can see a yellow baggy attached to the windscreen of our can.

    The location is in Hendon NW9

    The job was for a private customer and not a landlord.
    Originally posted by JBlackmore
    Private customer who lived in flats on the same site where you parked? Or a business on that site?

    Either of those would have certain rights of way including a likely right or easement allowing (probably) for a Gas Engineer to park to access the property re an emergency call out gas leak. Tell us if this was a homeowner with a communal car park or a business in an industrial car park area?

    I would respond telling them that the driver was on emergency call-out to attend (blah blah) and as the customer was a resident/business on site, the vehicular access was a right or easement under the grant under the lease of the customer on site. No permit is required in such emergency circumstances or life in a block of flats (or business car park) would be ''unworkable'', as was held by Judge Harris QC in Jopson v Homeguard.

    Finish by saying if they disagree you will defend this in court and they will be liable for the cost of a Company Director having to appear as witness as well as the driver, who was doing his job - faffing around getting permits is clearly not appropriate for an emergency gas leak - and a penalty is unrecoverable in these circumstances.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 18-01-2017 at 1:50 PM.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 12th Mar 18, 3:19 PM
    • 17,992 Posts
    • 28,489 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    • #8
    • 12th Mar 18, 3:19 PM
    • #8
    • 12th Mar 18, 3:19 PM
    Debt collection letters. They will 'seek their clients instructions ......', so this isn't a Letter Before Action. Nothing for you to do with these, other than file and retain.

    If they're going to sue, they will need to send a formal LBA and real court papers. Come back if you get these. Nothing you can do (other than paying them) to prevent them doing so, if the decide to follow that path. We can provide you with help if they do.
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 12th Mar 18, 3:33 PM
    • 9,494 Posts
    • 9,252 Thanks
    The Deep
    • #9
    • 12th Mar 18, 3:33 PM
    • #9
    • 12th Mar 18, 3:33 PM
    This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of contracts for alleged parking offences.

    Parking Eye, COM, Smart,s and a smaller company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each year). They nearly always lose) and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P.

    The problem has become so rampant that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Watch the video of the Second Reading in the HofC recently.

    http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

    and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind most of these companies may well be put out of business by Christmas.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • JBlackmore
    • By JBlackmore 12th Mar 18, 3:50 PM
    • 14 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    JBlackmore
    You gentleman are, as always, amazing.
    Thank you so much.
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 12th Mar 18, 4:25 PM
    • 7,539 Posts
    • 10,033 Thanks
    beamerguy
    You gentleman are, as always, amazing.
    Thank you so much.
    Originally posted by JBlackmore
    The old DRP utter rubbish again

    Legal team ? my a*s, it's the teaboy .... DRP really
    do live in cloud cuckoo land
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • JBlackmore
    • By JBlackmore 20th Mar 18, 1:22 PM
    • 14 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    JBlackmore


    8 July 2016 we were called out to a private leasehold flat to attend to a suspected gas leak Beaufort Park Estate, Hendon, London.

    9 Aug 2016 an NTK (POFA 2012) was sent stating a Fixed Charge Notice for 95 had been attached to vehicle on expiry of P&D ticket.

    15 Aug 2016 We appealed that our engineer did not find the FCN on the vehicle. Also as he was attending to a gas leak he was unable to leave the property until it was made safe.
    We enclosed a copy of the invoice to the customer and requested Napier cancel.

    23 Aug Napier rejected, saying they had considered our letter but the vehicle was parked in breach of the clearly displayed T&Cs. They offered a discount to 50
    If paid within 14 days or an appeal to the IAS within 21 days.

    After several DRP letters we have received this letter from BW Legal. Should we treat it as a formal letter before claim and request more info from them now?
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 20th Mar 18, 1:43 PM
    • 9,494 Posts
    • 9,252 Thanks
    The Deep
    "We will seek our client's instruction" means not an LBA but a debt collection letter, and BW legal is another low rent firm specialising in aiding and abetting these scammers.

    IMO they would be insane to take this to court, but some of these companies are none too bright.

    This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors.

    Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, and another company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each year). They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

    Hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned.

    The problem has become so rampant that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Watch the video of the Second Reading in the HofC recently.

    http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

    and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind most of these companies may well be put out of business by Christmas.
    Last edited by The Deep; 20-03-2018 at 1:48 PM.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • IamEmanresu
    • By IamEmanresu 20th Mar 18, 1:59 PM
    • 2,412 Posts
    • 4,289 Thanks
    IamEmanresu
    This one is going to be interesting. I'll put it in my diary.

    First they came for the gasman, and I did not speak out!!!8212;
    Because I was not a gasman.

    Then they came for the milkman, and I did not speak out!!!8212;
    Because I was not a milkman.

    Then they came for the postman, and I did not speak out!!!8212;
    Because I was not a postman.

    Then they came for me!!!8212;and there was no one left to speak for me.
    Idiots please note: If you intend NOT to read the information on the Notice of Allocation and hand a simple win to the knuckle dragging ex-clampers, then don't waste people's time with questions on a claim you'll not defend.
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 20th Mar 18, 2:07 PM
    • 2,748 Posts
    • 3,413 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    I would respond, mostly because the court probably wont care if it is a real LBA or not - theyll just see you ignoring solicitors.

    SImply state your previous position si unchanged, and you require them to refer the debt back to their principal and not contact you again.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 20th Mar 18, 2:29 PM
    • 58,434 Posts
    • 71,937 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Why not ask for evidence of the legal fees expenditure, given that BW Legal are known not to charge for debt collection 'services' and ask on what basis their client is holding your company liable for time spent by a Gas Engineer fixing an emergency gas leak and making it safe.

    Remind them that:

    HHJ Charles Harris, a Senior Circuit Judge hearing on appeal the case of Jopson v Homeguard in 2016, stated that life in a block of flats would be impossible if delivery/emergency vehicles could not stop for the time it would take to address what he described as a 'vicissitude'. This must be considered on all fours with that finding. On what planet are Napier owed an unconscionable sum of money every time an emergency Gas Engineer - or even an Ambulance or Fire engine - has to attend this site for the safety of the residents?

    Would Napier rather our company boycotts this location, spreads the word to other local Gas Engineers that it is a no-go area, so we all refuse to attend gas leaks while Napier still infest the site, or alternatively, how about we charge these people a extra 100 a call out to cover Napier's charge and admin in dealing with this pathetic threat? Clearly this would drive away residents in the long run as publicity spread that an entire block was having to pay an extra 3 figures or not have Gas Leaks attended. This conduct undoubtedly falls foul of the Unfair Terms Act - there was not agreed charge, no contract with Napier - and this is just the sort of situation that Sir Greg Knight will be interested in.

    We are planning to contact him and the local Trading Standards Officers, as well as to warn the site landowner/Managing Agent what is going on, since it involves their tenants' and/or leaseholders' safety in the buildings. This situation cannot continue, must be in breach of the landowner's covenants, removing the residents' rights to peaceful enjoyment of their property; it represents a serious nuisance and danger for residents at this location.

    It seems that Napier is prepared to create a stand-off, holding Gas Engineers to ransom. This cannot end well for your client and we are prepared to fight this in court, and are now charging for our replies at a reasonable rate, given the waste of man hours spent on the matter. Please find our first invoice attached; we will be charging 50 a time for replying to any pre-court letter and we consider that BW Legal are accepting our terms on behalf of your clients, by performance, by virtue of continuing to waste the company's time and money in pursuit of a meritless case.

    We are certain Mr de Savary, as a business man himself, will understand our untenable position and we ask that the matter is now referred to him personally, as Napier's owner. Should the charge now be cancelled, and assurances be made that this will never happen again, we will waive our invoice. Napier should consider this to be a last chance drop-hands offer.

    We are now aware that Parliament discussed the dubious practices of BW Legal (named and shamed) and your client's 'rogue' industry only last month. It is clear that the so-called private parking 'industry' that robo-claim legal firms like BW Legal are propping up, is skating on thin ice in 2018. These are some of the comments made by the MPs in Parliament concerning the 'curse' of the unregulated parking industry (Feb 2018):

    https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2018-02-02/debates/CC84AF5E-AC6E-4E14-81B1-066E6A892807/Parking(CodeOfPractice)Bill

    ''Rip-offs from car park Cowboys must stop''; unfair treatment; signage deliberately confusing to ensure a PCN is issued; ''years of abuse by rogue parking companies''; bloodsuckers; ''the current system of regulation is hopeless, like putting Dracula in charge of the blood-bank''; extortionate fines; rogue operators; ''sense of injustice''; unfair charges and notices; wilfully misleading; signage is a deliberate act to deceive or mislead; ''confusing signs are often deliberate, to trap innocent drivers''; unreasonable; a curse; harassing; operating in a disgusting way; appeals service is no guarantee of a fair hearing; loathed; outrageous scam; dodgy practice; outrageous abuse; unscrupulous practices; ''and finally, by way of unanimous conclusion: ''we need to crack down on these rogue companies. They are an absolute disgrace to this country. Ordinary motorists and ordinary residents should not have to put up with this''.
    As you are a company (am I right?) I would start attaching an invoice for 50 every time your company has to respond. See above...adapt to suit, get angry.

    Copy in Trading Standards, your local MP and the site owner/Managing agent to really put the cat among the pigeons.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 20-03-2018 at 2:45 PM.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

443Posts Today

4,834Users online

Martin's Twitter