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
    • sybee
    • By sybee 13th Jan 18, 3:10 PM
    • 7Posts
    • 9Thanks
    sybee
    Half parked in bay full of snow across designated lines
    • #1
    • 13th Jan 18, 3:10 PM
    Half parked in bay full of snow across designated lines 13th Jan 18 at 3:10 PM
    Hi all,

    I've been reading the sticky and sample cases etc. - this is really great info.

    I'm hoping for a steer now again on my case as I attempt to combat this PCN from UKPC on a shopping park with around 20 stores.
    I had parked in a bay which was half full of snow, so I was not completely within the lines of the bay, and got a PCN citing "Not parked correctly within the markings of the bay or space." within the hour I was there.
    I did make purchases on the day and have receipts.

    Before finding this website, I'd already spoke with the shopping park manager about this and although initially they agreed this was harsh and was going to get this revoked, when ringing back to confirm this was complete, has now said UKPC want to pursue this and I have to take this up with them.
    He then started citing the number of signs on the site (56) and started to sound like a UKPC attendant, which concerns me. I did explain as the shopping park, they have the power to revoke this regardless of what UKPC want to do. But they did not want to know.

    This turn around in the decision to help and revoke has cost me a number of days of my payment period, I am today on day 14.

    My next step is to go to each of the stores and speak to the store manager in person along with the following letter. I'd appreaciate a sanity check on the content and the plan to do this. (it's based on one I've read here.)

    ------------------------------------------------

    OFFICIAL COMPLAINT ABOUT UKPC, AS AGENTS FOR WARWICKSHIRE SHOPPING PARK

    I am forced to make an official complaint to you because the actions of your agent, UKPC, are upsetting, intimidatory and will drive away genuine <storename> customers in the long run. You can no doubt guess that we have received a windscreen parking charge notice purporting to mimic a 'parking ticket' from UKPC.

    On Saturday 30th December, we took our daughters shopping as they wished to spend some of the money they had received as Christmas presents. We parked in an end bay, but as this was half filled with snow and ice, we could not completely park within the designated lines of that bay. My eldest daughter browsed Outfit and then went on to H&M. My youngest daughter wished to buy a Netball, as she had received a netball post as a Christmas present. We went to DW Sports Fitness, where she liked and purchased a netball from this store (see receipt below). We then went onto Costa Coffee purchasing 2 coffees (for us) and 2 hot chocolates for the girls (receipt below), before returning to the car. To our complete shock we had a parking charge notice on the cars windscreen citing reasonable cause to believe we had breached parking terms and conditions due to “not parking correctly within the markings of the bay or space."
    We are now expected to have to explain our actions to a third party private company who we had no contract with, and who are demanding a lot of money (£100) from us – which I think is totally unacceptable.

    We are very upset and increasingly angry about this entire episode. After an enjoyable Christmas, our decision to shop at this shopping park has now left a nasty taste in the mouth. Our family is horrified that Warwickshire shopping park, and in turn, <storename> can allow such a notorious firm to harass customers on your behalf.
    I am aware that other customers were also receiving parking charge notices at end bays filled with snow, which I can only assume will be the same reason. A number of customers were commenting about this behaviour as they walked past these vehicles, one referring to this act as “disgusting”.

    I have researched the matter and intend to escalate my challenge against UKPC to the independent stage (Parking on Private Land Appeals). However, I am giving <storename> the chance to quash the fake PCN once and for all because I feel you need to know that you and your agents are alienating genuine customers due to UKPC's zero-tolerance policy.

    Well before renewing your contracts with UKPC when the time comes, might I just suggest you take time to read and digest the implications to other Retailers, Supermarkets & customers, and the picture painted of UKPC’s aggressive business practices.

    Notwithstanding what UKPC may well have to say on the matter, no doubt involving spin about their firm 'being members of the BPA Approved Operator Scheme' (in reality, merely trade body 'club membership' which enables them to buy registered keeper data and certainly does not 'regulate' their industry) I would also respectfully suggest <storename> should research the company you are associating with - in truth, UKPC have a terrible online reputation and sue customers over minor 'infringements' without referral to their clients, like yourselves, who may still naively believe that their agenda is 'parking management'.

    I would welcome your own view on this harassment and hope you see fit to ensure that UKPC cancel the 'ticket' forthwith. My research about this matter has revealed that in some cases, stores do cancel tickets for genuine customers which has helped to restore my faith a little, albeit tempered with frustration that <storename> are allowing such an aggressive agent to have free reign to intimidate customers for their own profit, at your (and your customers') own expense.

    yours,

    Mr x

    (UKPC “Parking charge” ref: xxxxxxxxxxx)

    This then contains 2 pictures of our car (with reg) parked alongside the snow in the bay. Another customers car from the same day (with reg anonymised) with a windscreen PCN and snow in the bay. And receipts for DW sports and Costa.



    I also took a few other pictures of the half filled snow bays without cars parked, but have not included.



    --------------------------------------------------

    I'll also email HO for these 20 companies where I can find contact details.
    I'll appeal on day 26 to UKPC using their website for the POPLA ref.

    Is this letter and approach ok?

    Thanks in advance :-)
Page 1
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 13th Jan 18, 3:20 PM
    • 9,505 Posts
    • 9,271 Thanks
    The Deep
    • #2
    • 13th Jan 18, 3:20 PM
    • #2
    • 13th Jan 18, 3:20 PM
    Write some bad stuff on their Facebook page
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 13th Jan 18, 3:24 PM
    • 18,020 Posts
    • 28,540 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    • #3
    • 13th Jan 18, 3:24 PM
    • #3
    • 13th Jan 18, 3:24 PM
    This turn around in the decision to help and revoke has cost me a number of days of my payment period, I am today on day 14.
    Forget the !!!8216;payment period!!!8217;. Are you seriously considering paying them - and don!!!8217;t tell us you want to take advantage of their !!!8216;reduced amount!!!8217; opportunity!

    Wait until day 25/26 from the day immediately following the parking event, then send the blue text initial appeal from the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, post #1. Then await their rejection, getting your POPLA Code, where, with help from the forum, you can get this killed off.

    Meanwhile continue with your complaints to the retail park and retailers.
    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.
    • sybee
    • By sybee 13th Jan 18, 3:45 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 9 Thanks
    sybee
    • #4
    • 13th Jan 18, 3:45 PM
    • #4
    • 13th Jan 18, 3:45 PM
    No I wasn't considering paying at a "discount"!
    Just info.

    Cheers
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 13th Jan 18, 4:54 PM
    • 7,556 Posts
    • 10,060 Thanks
    beamerguy
    • #5
    • 13th Jan 18, 4:54 PM
    • #5
    • 13th Jan 18, 4:54 PM
    UKPC will persue anyone because they are scammers.

    I assume they have provided pictures showing the snow covered
    white line.

    WARNING ABOUT UKPC ????
    They were banned by the DVLA for 3 months because they
    faked pictures.
    Stupidly, the DVLA failed to give them a lifetime ban
    for fraud.

    The moral here is to check everything these bad boys do

    By the way, sounds like the Shopping car park manager could
    well be on commission
    Last edited by beamerguy; 13-01-2018 at 5:21 PM.
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 13th Jan 18, 5:14 PM
    • 58,533 Posts
    • 72,030 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #6
    • 13th Jan 18, 5:14 PM
    • #6
    • 13th Jan 18, 5:14 PM
    The 'delay the registered keeper appeal until day 26' tactic was dreamed up especially with UKPC in mind(!), so don't step away from that tried & tested procedure. Nine times out of ten, or more, posters then get no NTK, and that's 100% win!
    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.

    • sybee
    • By sybee 30th Jan 18, 8:08 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 9 Thanks
    sybee
    • #7
    • 30th Jan 18, 8:08 PM
    • #7
    • 30th Jan 18, 8:08 PM
    ok - appealed with the template. Receive an appeal rejection that attempts to address each point.

    What do you think of this bit?

    "Please note we must liaise with the driver directly and by not providing the driver's details you will be accepting liability for the parking charge.

    Paragraph 9(2)(b) of schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, states that we must inform the registered keeper that the driver of a vehicle is required to pay the parking charge in full. It also notes that as we do not know the driver’s name or current postal address, the registered keeper, if they were not the driver at the time, should inform the operator (i.e. us) of the name and current address of the driver and pass the notice to them. The Act also warns that if, at the end of the period of 28 days (beginning with the day after the Parking Charge is sent), the parking charge has not been paid in full and the operator does not know both the name and current address of the driver, the operator has the right to recover any unpaid part of the parking charge from the registered keeper. This warning is given under Paragraph 9(2)(f) of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and is subject to us complying with the applicable conditions under Schedule 4 of that Act (which we consider we do comply with, to the letter)."
    Last edited by sybee; 30-01-2018 at 8:10 PM.
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 30th Jan 18, 8:18 PM
    • 7,713 Posts
    • 7,457 Thanks
    KeithP
    • #8
    • 30th Jan 18, 8:18 PM
    • #8
    • 30th Jan 18, 8:18 PM
    I commented on that text on a different UKPC thread only yesterday:



    Are you following other UKPC threads?
    Last edited by KeithP; 30-01-2018 at 8:20 PM.
    .
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 30th Jan 18, 8:27 PM
    • 7,556 Posts
    • 10,060 Thanks
    beamerguy
    • #9
    • 30th Jan 18, 8:27 PM
    • #9
    • 30th Jan 18, 8:27 PM
    ok - appealed with the template. Receive an appeal rejection that attempts to address each point.

    What do you think of this bit?

    "Please note we must liaise with the driver directly and by not providing the driver's details you will be accepting liability for the parking charge.

    Paragraph 9(2)(b) of schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, states that we must inform the registered keeper that the driver of a vehicle is required to pay the parking charge in full. It also notes that as we do not know the driver!!!8217;s name or current postal address, the registered keeper, if they were not the driver at the time, should inform the operator (i.e. us) of the name and current address of the driver and pass the notice to them. The Act also warns that if, at the end of the period of 28 days (beginning with the day after the Parking Charge is sent), the parking charge has not been paid in full and the operator does not know both the name and current address of the driver, the operator has the right to recover any unpaid part of the parking charge from the registered keeper. This warning is given under Paragraph 9(2)(f) of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and is subject to us complying with the applicable conditions under Schedule 4 of that Act (which we consider we do comply with, to the letter)."
    Originally posted by sybee
    Of course the UKPC scammers will say all of this.
    It is indeed the rubbish they spout to try to find out
    who is the driver ????

    GUESS WHAT, you are not going to tell them are you ?

    This is the typical junk letter UKPC sends out

    You now wait for a POPLA code so you can appeal
    further with the help of this forum.

    Bet these scammers made no mention of the snow
    covering the white lines ... no ?
    One would imagine that if UKPC were employed to
    manage the car park, they would have made it
    suitable for use

    No reply needed to the brain dead, await the
    POPLA code
    Last edited by beamerguy; 30-01-2018 at 8:31 PM.
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • sybee
    • By sybee 30th Jan 18, 8:31 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 9 Thanks
    sybee
    Thanks Keith P - I did a search for the bit I posted, but didn't see your post- thanks :-)
    Thanks Beamer Guy :-)
    • pappa golf
    • By pappa golf 30th Jan 18, 8:50 PM
    • 8,706 Posts
    • 9,307 Thanks
    pappa golf
    r. This warning is given under Paragraph 9(2)(f) of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and is subject to us complying with the applicable conditions under Schedule 4 of that Act (which we consider we do comply with, to the letter)."

    another flying pig passed overhead
    Save a Rachael

    buy a share in crapita
    • Half_way
    • By Half_way 30th Jan 18, 9:33 PM
    • 4,158 Posts
    • 5,902 Thanks
    Half_way
    Name and shame the shopping park, for they will be jointly liable for the actions of their agents.
    This is the sort of thing the press will absolutly lap up - car park covered with snow, parking ticket for parking over the snow obscured lines.
    If you do try for publicity - keep hammering home that the shopping centre/retail park/landowner is responsible and liable for the actions of its agents
    From the Plain Language Commission:

    "The BPA has surely become one of the most socially dangerous organisations in the UK"
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 30th Jan 18, 10:09 PM
    • 58,533 Posts
    • 72,030 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    The Act also warns that if, at the end of the period of 28 days (beginning with the day after the Parking Charge is sent),
    Errrrmmmm...no, UKPC. Smacks of desperation when they try to shoehorn some POFA wording required in a NTK, into a rejection letter, which is certainly not a NTK!

    Apart from the issue spotted by KeithP as posted on that other thread, UKPC have:

    - misdescribed the wording, talking about 'the day after the Parking Charge is sent' but this deadline refers only to the date that a fully-compliant NTK is sent. In any case, no Parking Charge Notice or 'NTK' (neither) has ever been sent!

    - forgotten the fact that the POFA says a NTK is only compliant (among other hoops to jump) if the operator has first obtained the data of the keeper from the Secretary of State (the DVLA). Not from any other source, not from a keeper's own appeal letter...nothing but the DVLA will do.

    Failed.

    The DVLA may or may not be interested in the fact that UKPC are misleadingly telling a keeper in a rejection letter, that they ARE liable, when hey cannot be. Absolutely cannot be liable.

    This is a serious breach of the BPA CoP, but do we honestly want UKPC to start getting it right? I think not, so on balance I would keep schtumm, not complain to the DVLA, and laugh all the way to POPLA!

    Show us your draft POPLA appeal that takes the above failures into account, spelling them out for POPLA.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 30-01-2018 at 10:13 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.

    • sybee
    • By sybee 24th Feb 18, 11:45 AM
    • 7 Posts
    • 9 Thanks
    sybee
    Need a little steer pls... the start of that appeal response I referred to earlier in the thread from UKPC read:
    "In order to make a final decision regarding your appeal, please provide the name and full postal address of the driver to our Appeals Department within fourteen days of the date of this letter."

    At the end it states:
    "Failure to provide this information will give us no alternative other than to make our final decision based on the previous information received. At this stage a POPLA verification code will be provided.
    Further correspondence can be sent by visiting our website at <appealwebsite> or by post to the address overleaf. Please ensure that if sending evidence by post that you include the parking charge reference number and vehicle registration."

    We received a letter through the post like this one from another thread, 5 days after appeal:
    https://
    s725.photobucket.com/user/corallus1/media/IMG_7356_zpsk8o02zue.jpg.html

    But haven't received a final decision or the POPLA verification code - should I now push for one using the appeals website?

    Today I make day 56.
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 24th Feb 18, 11:59 AM
    • 7,556 Posts
    • 10,060 Thanks
    beamerguy
    http://s725.photobucket.com/user/corallus1/media/IMG_7356_zpsk8o02zue.jpg.html

    It is very difficult to understand why UKPC are employing more
    idiots to send out this rubbish.

    Of course they don't know who the driver is/was and that's
    because you have not told them and never likely to ??

    They issued a ticket on a vehicle which they claim was not parked
    correctly ..... you have shown them that the lines were not visible
    because of snow.

    They do not need to know who was driving to agree or not.
    It's not rocket science to understand this.
    This is why UKPC are branded as cowboys and scammers, they
    achieve that title all by themselves.

    The BPA has been told about this UKPC rubbish, the BPA
    seem to ignore it and that is why the BPA are now a defunct
    organisation which no motorist could ever trust.

    Just wait for a POPLA code and get all the help you need here
    Last edited by beamerguy; 24-02-2018 at 12:43 PM.
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • sybee
    • By sybee 24th Feb 18, 3:28 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 9 Thanks
    sybee
    Thanks. (The lines weren’t covered with snow, the bay was piled high with snow. Their pics show how high it was!?!)

    Anyway...
    Would you consider that letter a valid NTK?

    And the Popla code if I’m not given this, do I continue to wait indefinitely?
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 24th Feb 18, 3:46 PM
    • 2,765 Posts
    • 3,439 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    That isn!!!8217;t a NtK. You can tell it isn!!!8217;t. It isn!!!8217;t repeating the info on the ntd , for a start

    You give them 35 days then tell the the appeal was accepted as they failed to reject it. BPA cop.
    • Johnersh
    • By Johnersh 24th Feb 18, 4:20 PM
    • 1,070 Posts
    • 2,069 Thanks
    Johnersh
    Just a thought - only you can know the precise facts, but you may wish to consider whether the contract was void for impossibility - the intervening weather being force majeure that prevented the bays either

    (i) being properly delineated; or
    (ii) anyone parking within them.

    See if you can get a weather forecast / images from the local press showing the snowfall...
    "The best advice I ever got was that knowledge is power and to keep reading."
    DISCLAIMER: I post thoughts as & when they occur. I don't advise. You are your own person and decision-maker. I'm unlikely to respond to DMs seeking personal advice. It's ill-advised & you lose the benefit of a group "take" on events.
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 24th Feb 18, 5:26 PM
    • 7,556 Posts
    • 10,060 Thanks
    beamerguy
    Thanks. (The lines weren!!!8217;t covered with snow, the bay was piled high with snow. Their pics show how high it was!?!)

    Anyway...
    Would you consider that letter a valid NTK?

    And the Popla code if I!!!8217;m not given this, do I continue to wait indefinitely?
    Originally posted by sybee
    So much for car park management then

    Just makes you wonder about the mentality of UKPC, could
    they get medical help on the NHS ??? probably not

    If they don't send a POPLA code after 35 days, complain to
    the BPA. There is nothing more they can do or say

    PS: I would love to see a judge's face looking at their own
    pictures .....
    Last edited by beamerguy; 24-02-2018 at 5:33 PM.
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • sybee
    • By sybee 1st Mar 18, 8:26 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 9 Thanks
    sybee
    So, on the weekend also did further research into the shopping park owners and the management company.
    Found the owners and also details for the park management company.

    So went for an email to both the media relations address for the owners and the head of asset management (same email 2 recipients)

    a day later the management company responded, and said they would look into this, including another dept / manager.

    2 days after this we get a response from management company - they're going to get this cancelled on this occasion .
    Through the post today we get this from UKPC:

    _________________________________________
    Thank you for your recent correspondence in relation to the above parking charge. We understand your frustration and appreciate the inconvenience this has caused you. It is not our intention to cause undue worry and frustration when enforcing our clients' terms and conditions of parking.

    Whilst we feel that the parking charge was correctly issued and that we were following the guidelines and enforcement controls agreed with our client, we have decided in this instance to cancel the parking charge as a gesture of goodwill.

    At all times UKPC strive to deliver a high quality service that enhances the existing quality standards insisted upon by our client.

    Please therefore take this letter as confirmation that your parking charge has now been cancelled and the matter concluded.

    Appeals dept.
    ______________________

    Today was 35th day after appeal. Not sure if its a result of the asset management intervention or the appeal. Suspect the first!

    We're not a fan of bad parking. If we'd have parked over a designated line just through laziness or something then charge would have been more deserved. But this was simply an unreasonable charge.

    Thanks for all of the help and info on the sticky. Its the info and forum members that gives you the confidence to challenge things like this :-)

    Thanks again.
    Last edited by sybee; 01-03-2018 at 8:35 PM.
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

519Posts Today

6,009Users online

Martin's Twitter