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
    • echo6
    • By echo6 23rd Dec 17, 8:01 PM
    • 39Posts
    • 20Thanks
    echo6
    IE Legal Total Parking Solutions
    • #1
    • 23rd Dec 17, 8:01 PM
    IE Legal Total Parking Solutions 23rd Dec 17 at 8:01 PM
    My son is a first year Uni Student, resident at the Swansea Bay campus. Is the registered keeper of the vehicle concerning three NtK PCNs which he ignored.

    Parking is free to resident students between 4pm-8am weekdays and free throughout the weekend to those who have acquired a Permit.
    All NtK PCNs are for the overnight period during a weekday. The one referenced in the letter from IE Legal has a photo of the vehicle on the road exiting the car park 08:15, 15 mins over the 4pm-8am period. The camera does not cover a view of the car park.

    He has received a letter from IE Legal, FORMAL DEMAND, NOTICE OF IMPENDING LEGAL ACTION on behalf of TPS for £110

    hxxp://i65.tinypic.com/2llkbnt.png
    hxxp://i66.tinypic.com/2yk05eg.png

    My son states the signage in the car park is poor, small letters and not visible to drivers, especially at night. He has a Permit issued by Estates & Facilities Management.

    It would appear the PCNs were generated whilst the Permit was being raised and issued.

    I am of the view to contest this and subsequent demands or any resulting CCC.

    I read with interest the other post here concerning TPS and IE Legal;
    hxxp://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5648451

    I have started following the advice in the NEWBIES and FAQ. including
    the LBC post hxxp://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4754020

    Although I'm not convinced that this letter could be construed as a LBC, should I respond to this letter indicating a dispute? How much detail should I provide at this stage?

    My assumption is that the POPLA appeals process is no longer valid in these circumstances?

    I will taking the issue up with the Universitie's Estates & Facilities Management regarding TPS.
    Last edited by echo6; 23-12-2017 at 9:43 PM.
Page 2
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 3rd Jan 18, 8:05 PM
    • 35,814 Posts
    • 20,062 Thanks
    Quentin

    According to Royal Mail I E Legal have yet to receive the letter my son sent on the 27th December 2017 in response to their first letter ! The University received theirs on the 28th December 2017.
    Originally posted by echo6
    Sounds like you used a signed for service.

    One should never use a signed for service when corresponding with these people.

    It allows recipients to prove letters have not been received by simply refusing to sign for them.

    Always use the free cert of posting you get on request when handing s letter into the Post Office
    Last edited by Quentin; 03-01-2018 at 8:27 PM.
    • echo6
    • By echo6 3rd Jan 18, 8:42 PM
    • 39 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    echo6
    Yes, thanks so I noticed, too late. That said, What's the difference? As I have a receipt that says both letters were posted at the same time on the same receipt. One has been signed for and the other is, uncertain.

    If I post using certificate of posting, what is the proof that it has been delivered?
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 3rd Jan 18, 9:41 PM
    • 35,814 Posts
    • 20,062 Thanks
    Quentin
    With a cert of posting it issue deemed delivered
    With signed for untracked your post office reference proves it's not been delivered

    Each letter has its own reference number when you use signed for.

    Both on one "receipt" just proves the PPC never received theirs!
    Last edited by Quentin; 03-01-2018 at 9:43 PM.
    • echo6
    • By echo6 3rd Jan 18, 9:52 PM
    • 39 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    echo6
    What satisfies the Court?

    This is a letter addressed to a Solicitor not a PPC.

    What is to say that my son ever received any PCNs prior to receiving these "NOTICE OF IMPENDING LEGAL ACTION"?

    I just read my receipt and it says both "CERTIFICATE of POSTING" & "SIGNED FOR 1st"
    Last edited by echo6; 03-01-2018 at 9:58 PM.
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 3rd Jan 18, 9:56 PM
    • 35,814 Posts
    • 20,062 Thanks
    Quentin
    What satisfies the Court?

    This is a letter addressed to a Solicitor not a PPC.

    What is to say that my son ever received any PCNs prior to receiving these "NOTICE OF IMPENDING LEGAL ACTION"?
    Originally posted by echo6

    This is all irrelevant stuff.

    A cert of posting satisfies the court as you were advised

    The courts don't send claims signed for.


    The police don't send nips signed for.
    Last edited by Quentin; 03-01-2018 at 9:59 PM.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 3rd Jan 18, 10:05 PM
    • 58,322 Posts
    • 71,856 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    'Signed for' was not the right choice - we NEVER tell people to do that, as it can be refused, and/or delayed in the sorting office until such time as someone signs for it. This adds an extra layer that can be caused by the PO or external issues with getting signatures (e.g. no-one answering the door) whereas a normal letter is never dependant on a front door being opened and someone wielding a pen to sign.

    A lot of solicitors I seem to recall from when I dealt with them in another job, close the office for the entire TWO WEEKS over Xmas/New Year, while they all go skiiing. So a signed-for letter just sits at the PO Sorting Office all that time. Not delivered!

    Whereas a normal 1st class letter (with certificate of posting for free from any PO counter, to evidence it was posted to that postcode and when) is already there with its foot in that door, ''deemed delivered'' within 2 working days unless proved to the contrary, even if the entire staff of SolicitorsRUs are up on the piste!

    What satisfies the Court?
    The section of the Interpretation Act 1978 about deemed delivery of 'normal' post.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 03-01-2018 at 10:30 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.

    • echo6
    • By echo6 3rd Jan 18, 10:17 PM
    • 39 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    echo6
    Understood, thank you.

    My son will be responding, via Certificate of posting, to this second letter.

    For amusement, I will still retain the receipt for the first letter.
    • echo6
    • By echo6 4th Jan 18, 9:09 AM
    • 39 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    echo6
    By the way, this second letter is for the 2nd PCN. Letters are identical with the exception of the dates of the alleged parking charge and the PCN reference.
    • echo6
    • By echo6 4th Jan 18, 1:28 PM
    • 39 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    echo6
    Third letter received today from I E Legal for the 3rd PCN.

    Subtly different as the Parking Charge Time is the date captured by the ANPR of the vehicle leaving the car park 08:15, which is 15 minutes over the conditions of the permit's use (4pm-8am)
    • echo6
    • By echo6 5th Jan 18, 9:38 AM
    • 39 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    echo6
    I have today received a response from the Land Owner St Mowden, not entirely satisfactorily

    The car park is managed by TPS and they have responsibility for the issuing of PCN’s, unfortunately due to the Data Protection Act they are not able to divulge to me any information relating to this specific case. However, it is my understanding there is a strict procedure for the issuing of notices, therefore if it is felt they have acted inappropriately or there is doubt to validity of the notices then this needs to be addressed directly to the operator.
    Any thoughts before I respond, and what I should request?
    • Half_way
    • By Half_way 5th Jan 18, 10:16 AM
    • 4,152 Posts
    • 5,886 Thanks
    Half_way
    will get back later
    From the Plain Language Commission:

    "The BPA has surely become one of the most socially dangerous organisations in the UK"
    • echo6
    • By echo6 5th Jan 18, 6:18 PM
    • 39 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    echo6
    Perhaps I have directed my correspondence to the incorrect contact at St Mowden, in the first instance I contacted the Property Director - West & Wales who directed me to the Senior Property Manager. It is the Senior Property Manager who provided the response above.

    I should add that I have already written to Director of Estates & Facilities Management at Swansea Bay University Site. I am aware the individual is moving on and I have yet to receive a response.

    Additionally my son has written to TPS requesting all information pertaining to him and his vehicle under the Data Protection Act.
    Last edited by echo6; 05-01-2018 at 6:24 PM.
    • Half_way
    • By Half_way 5th Jan 18, 7:25 PM
    • 4,152 Posts
    • 5,886 Thanks
    Half_way
    For a rough idea ( complete with typos, poor grimmer etc) do not use this 'as is'

    Dear property manager, thank you for your reply.
    I am sure you are aware that the Private parking industry is un regulated industry, and its two main trade bodies, the British Parking Association limited, and the International Parking Community are private trade associations whose main objective is to protect its members, namely the parking company's such as TPS.

    I am also sure that you do not need reminding that you are jointly and severally liable for the actions of your agents, TPS.
    I have provided details of the drivers parking arrangements and times that the so called parking charge notices were issued, and from this you should be able to see that your agents have issued these incorrectly.
    As such I have a reasonable suspicion that your agents will be in breach of their KADOE (keeper on day of event) contract with the DVLA ( who provide registered keeper data ) and as such had no just cause to access, and process personal data - a breach of the Data protection act.

    I am therefore requesting that you instruct your agents to cancel pursuing this matter with immediate effect, and/or issue me a statement stating that you do not support TPS in pursuing this parking charge notice, and would prefer that this matter be closed.
    I look forward to your reply in this, love echo6 xxxx
    From the Plain Language Commission:

    "The BPA has surely become one of the most socially dangerous organisations in the UK"
    • Ralph-y
    • By Ralph-y 5th Jan 18, 11:03 PM
    • 2,647 Posts
    • 3,323 Thanks
    Ralph-y
    please keep on with all the good help/ information that you have been receiving ....

    could I please humbly ask if you would kindly consider read the link in the post below and help the cause ...........................

    WHICH are asking again for consumer problems

    https://whichcouk.bsd.net/page/s/which-taking-on-2018

    Which are pretty good at hitting the government with
    consumer problems.
    No harm in them hearing from you, I have done it for
    the great parking scam and their dodgly solicitors

    Only takes a couple of mins


    this is to hopefully get 'Which' onboard to help stamp out this unregulated industry

    thanks

    Ralph
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 5th Jan 18, 11:13 PM
    • 58,322 Posts
    • 71,856 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    You could add that TPS are being economical with the truth by hiding behind the DPA, after all, what they are refusing to show is your own data and it is for you to say who can see that.

    For the avoidance of doubt, add that you DO expressly authorise the information held about you and your vehicle (e.g. photos and case notes) to be passed by TPS to the Senior Property Manager, in the interests of St Modwen actually listening to this complaint, not blindly believing their contractor's bland excuses to hide the facts.

    They need to remove their rose-coloured spectacles and see this scam for what it really is, at last, and consider for a minute just how damaging such unfair business conduct and demands are on the reputation of those who make the mistake of contracting with such notorious parking firms.

    And do as Ralph-y asks, please, and tell Which? about this, and ask them to seek to investigate this scam in 2018.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 05-01-2018 at 11:29 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.

    • echo6
    • By echo6 6th Jan 18, 12:01 PM
    • 39 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    echo6
    Today, we received correspondence dated 3rd January from I E Legal Solicitors "PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL FOR DEBT CLAIMS" Included was the ANNEX 1 reply form and ANNEX 2 financial statement.

    Redacted copies of their correspondence;
    hxxps://drive.google.com/open?id=10rX7gUD2fQjlPcHMA06dhfRGC8FL4OMr
    hxxps://drive.google.com/open?id=1AC8chM_aDLJ7tnYA9TyJiN6D3Y2mwvI9
    hxxps://drive.google.com/open?id=1NQj_dSWu8at_DyNTFRktaBOvMFFIpS7i
    Last edited by echo6; 07-01-2018 at 3:50 PM. Reason: further redaction required
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 6th Jan 18, 12:24 PM
    • 7,507 Posts
    • 9,992 Thanks
    beamerguy
    "Today, we received correspondence dated 3rd January from I E Legal Solicitors "PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL FOR DEBT CLAIMS" Included was the ANNEX 1 reply form and ANNEX 2 financial statement."

    YOUR PAGES LIVE ...................................
    Redacted copies of their correspondence;
    http://drive.google.com/open?id=10rX7gUD2fQjlPcHMA06dhfRGC8FL4OMr

    http://drive.google.com/open?id=1AC8chM_aDLJ7tnYA9TyJiN6D3Y2mwvI9

    http://drive.google.com/open?id=1NQj_dSWu8at_DyNTFRktaBOvMFFIpS7i
    Last edited by beamerguy; 07-01-2018 at 6:23 PM.
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 6th Jan 18, 3:57 PM
    • 58,322 Posts
    • 71,856 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    OK, so you already know how to respond - a mix of what we've already said, plus all the other zillions of examples of replies to LBCCCs here.
    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.

    • echo6
    • By echo6 7th Jan 18, 12:03 PM
    • 39 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    echo6
    Preparing the APPENDIX 1 response, thus far.

    I dispute the debt and any contractual agreement between Total Parking Solutions Limited and myself and therefore dispute any alleged debt owed.

    I am a resident student at Swansea Bay University Campus and a Parking Permit holder. The Permit being for the use of University’s Car Parks including Swansea Bay University Campus Staff Car Park. A copy of this Permit is attached. The cost of the Parking Permit is £5 covering the period of September 2017 to September 2018.

    The signage at Swansea Bay University Campus Staff Car Park is inadequate, contrary to the recommendations set out by the British Parking Association's Code of Practice (paragraph 18.2) which is necessary to inform the driver the car park is managed and that there are terms and conditions for its use.

    Total Parking Solutions have failed to bring notice to the driver, contrary to the recommendation set out by British Parking Associated Codes of Practice Section 19.2
    “If you want to enforce a parking charge notice under the keeper liability provisions of POFA 2012 you will need to show how you brought the requirement to pay parking charges to the attention of drivers. See paragraphs 2 (2) and (3) of Schedule 4.” The signage being inadequate for a driver to see such a notice, and the car park being poorly lit at night.

    The creditor is not the landowner and suffers no loss whatsoever as a result of a vehicle parking at the location in question. TPS have failed to state their authority as “the creditor” as entitled to recover unpaid parking charges as either the Land Owner or on written authority from the Land Owner for the purpose of a “relevant contract”

    TPS have failed to provide evidence that they are authorized by the Land Owner to pursue outstanding parking charges.

    TPS are in breach of the recommendation set out by the British parking Associations Code of Practice Section 21.5. They have failed to adhere to the Surveillance Camera Commissioner’s Code of Practice Principle 3, “There must be as much transparency in the use of a surveillance camera system as possible, including a published contact point for access to information and complaints.” There is inadequate signage in relation to the use of ANPR and nowhere is there any publication of where information or complaints can be addressed.

    The creditors claim of £110 per Parking Charge Notice is in excess of the British Parking Associations Code of Practice Section 23.b “Where a Parking Charge becomes overdue and before Court Proceedings have commenced, a reasonable sum (which covers the cost of recovering debt) may be added for the debt recovery fees. This sum must not exceed £70 unless prior approval from the BPA has been granted.”

    I need more documents or information
    I need a copy of
    1) A plan showing where Signs are displayed, and when they were placed
    2) Details of the signs displayed, (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed)
    3) Witness statements relating to each of the alleged debts
    4) All PCN notices issued by TPS
    5) ANPR operator procedures including manual ANPR quality check for each PCN raised.
    6) All photographs relied upon in respect of the issued PCNs
    7) Written authorisation of the Land Owner in accordance with the requirement set out by the British Parking Associations Code of Practice, Section 7
    8) A copy of any alleged contract with the driver
    9) What has been added to the Parking Charge, what that represents and how it has been calculated
    10) Registered keeper Data requests to DVLA in relation to the vehicle for each alleged contravention
    11) Provide a copy of the approval from British Parking Association as per Section 23.b

    With regard to the Surveillance bit, whilst its an argument for dis-proportionality, not sure it makes sense as a defense..
    • echo6
    • By echo6 7th Jan 18, 1:30 PM
    • 39 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    echo6
    If any one is interested I have posted a video of the drive into the car park, twilight hours.

    hxxps://drive.google.com/file/d/1wJ0ebTySOAnklGJYQls63kW6I60C1gGo/view?usp=sharing
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

3,971Posts Today

8,329Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • We all knew we'd win in the end. Never in doubt! ....walks away whistling

  • Yeeesss. Phew. Wow. Uh. Oy yoy yoy

  • It's interesting that 80% of the crowd are young women... According to the close ups we keep seeing anyway.

  • Follow Martin