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@.

    • Potatini
    • By Potatini 12th Apr 18, 7:44 PM
    • 4Posts
    • 1Thanks
    SCS for parking with permit!
    • #1
    • 12th Apr 18, 7:44 PM
    SCS for parking with permit! 12th Apr 18 at 7:44 PM
    Hi Folks, first thing first - thank you for running this help section, who's being a life saver! This is my case. I hope you can help me through it and kick this "people" away for good!

    I received a total of 5 parking fines for being parked in the staff car park at the hospital where I work, despite I have a valid permit disc on the dash and daily scratched scratch card. Together with the parking permit disc, the staff parking area is accessible only by swiping a name badge, which I also own. I used the facilities within standard working hours, although my permit is valid for 24/7. Colleagues told me that they had the same issue and recommended to discard the notices, as "they'll stop writing" ... but I received a standard LBC from SCS Law instead! I've been naive, I know. At least I kept all the "ignored" threatening paperwork.

    The LBC (I can't attach a link) seemed to be complete with details of the fines and I think responds to the criteria given by the POFA. at least for what I can understand! I informed myself as much as I could, reading through similar cases on your forum, trying to understand what I could do to defend myself. I'm not very good in this, tho, but - I replied to their LBC as follows:

    Dear Sirs, I have received your Letter Before Claim dated 22 February 2018. As requested in your reply form, please receive a detailed reply hereby. I deny any debt to CP Plus Ltd. The driver is not identified in your letter and your client has failed to meet the requirements of The Protection of Freedoms Act, schedule 4 to pursue me as keeper.

    As the registered keeper of the vehicle I have not received a Notice to Keeper. As you can see, the law is unequivocal on this matter. A Notice to Keeper must be served where the driver has not been identified. Without this, the creditor does not have the right to recover the charge from the keeper of the vehicle. As there has been no admission regarding who was driving the vehicle and no evidence of this has been provided, the Private Parking Operator has failed to comply with the keeper liability requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Paragraph 4 of The Act states that: (1) The creditor has the right to recover any unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle. (2)The right under this paragraph applies only if: (a) the conditions specified in paragraphs 5, 6, 11 and 12 (so far as applicable) are met. The condition specified in paragraph 6 is “that the creditor (or a person acting for or on behalf of the creditor): (a) has given a notice to driver in accordance with paragraph 7, followed by a notice to keeper in accordance with paragraph 8; or (b) has given a notice to keeper in accordance with paragraph 9." Paragraph 9 states this notice to keeper must be given within a "period of 28 days following the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to driver was given" It would be unreasonable of CP Plus to rely on the assumption that the Registered Keeper was the driver (as in Elliot v Loake) which I would like to highlight was a criminal case with ample evidence against the driver.

    Your Letter Before Claim refers to "a number of letters" sent to me by your Client - however I am now informing you that I was not in receipt of these items of correspondence and was therefore unable to act upon them at the time. Please provide copies of all documentation and correspondence, along with proof of dates of postage. When these are supplied, please also confirm whether the intended action is founded on a contractual charge, a breach of a contract or trespass.

    Please confirm that your client's contract with the land-holder includes specific authority to take legal action and that this will be produced for the court. Whilst I await your timely response, I would also like to remind you of the guidance given to operators in POPLA's 2015 Annual Report by Henry Greenslade, Chief Adjudicator in which he reminded them of a keeper's right not to name the driver whilst still not being held liable for an unpaid parking charge under Schedule 4 of POFA. "There appears to be continuing misunderstanding about Schedule 4. Provided certain conditions are strictly complied with, it provides for recovery of unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle. There is no 'reasonable presumption' in law that the registered keeper of a vehicle is the driver.

    Operators should never suggest anything of the sort. Further, a failure by the recipient of a notice issued under Schedule 4 to name the driver, does not of itself mean that the recipient has accepted that they were the driver at the material time. Unlike, for example, a Notice of Intended Prosecution where details of the driver of a vehicle must be supplied when requested by the police, pursuant to Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988“a keeper sent a Schedule 4 notice has no legal obligation to name the driver. [...] If {POFA 2012 Schedule 4 is} not complied with then keeper liability does not generally pass.'' I would like to remind both CP Plus and SCS Law that a PCN with the basic non-statutory wording that your client freely chooses to use, can only hold the driver liable. Therefore, please kindly show me your client's evidence of whom the driver was at each occurrence. When I receive the documents and your explanations I will be in a position to make a more detailed response.

    It would be unreasonable to proceed with litigation before you have clarified your client's cause of action.
    I've promptly received their reply, in which they said basically that they are claiming with me as a keeper, attaching their reasons and reiterate that if I don't pay £400, they'll take me to court with no further notice. However, there was no reply about who owns the land and what type of breech are they referring to, points that I'll surely reiterate in my next letter.

    Sadly, due to house moving and holidays, I missed the 14 days term to respond to their second letter I know another envelope from SCS has reached my previous address yesterday (maybe calling for court proceedings?) and this is now on my way. If it can be of any use, I could try to call again the hospital, who owns the parking grounds and ask for grace, but I doubt they'll intervene, as they previously stated they "can't do anything to help, once CP is in the way" (Is that true?) when I got in touch beforehand. In addition to that, I'm not employed by the hospital anymore, so I'll probably be ignored.

    I'll appeal to the all mighty forum, as this is going beyond my knowledge and all this reading is overwhelming! I'm writing my response, requesting once again proof of their the authority to take legal action and why am I receiving their correspondence, as the parking area can be accessed by an employee with a current swipe card only and there is a parking permit registered with the number plate of the "pirate car".

    Should I contest their affirmation that POPLA doesn't apply to my case and request a POPLA code? What else should I add? Can anyone help writing this letter in the most effective way, please? Thanks for your support!
    Last edited by Potatini; 15-04-2018 at 5:27 PM. Reason: Adjusting formatting
Page 1
    • Redx
    • By Redx 12th Apr 18, 7:52 PM
    • 17,771 Posts
    • 22,396 Thanks
    • #2
    • 12th Apr 18, 7:52 PM
    • #2
    • 12th Apr 18, 7:52 PM
    much too late for popla , there is no way the PPC will give you popla codes now unless a judge ordered them to do so as a method of ADR

    your best bet is landowner cancellations, which will be the trust

    they are jointly and severally liable for the actions of their contractor, CP , see this document from a few years ago

    keep up the LBC replies using post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread

    however, if the latest letter is an MCOL from Northampton CCBC , then it will be a live court claim, that same post #2 helps you deal with an MCOL as well as LBC

    I suggest you also use the return key more often to space out your paragraphs , like I have done , as your wall of text is difficult to read
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 12th Apr 18, 8:00 PM
    • 17,252 Posts
    • 27,162 Thanks
    • #3
    • 12th Apr 18, 8:00 PM
    • #3
    • 12th Apr 18, 8:00 PM
    Horrendous wall of text.
    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.
    • Potatini
    • By Potatini 15th Apr 18, 5:40 PM
    • 4 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    • #4
    • 15th Apr 18, 5:40 PM
    • #4
    • 15th Apr 18, 5:40 PM
    Sorry for the formatting, have now sorted it so its hopefully easier to follow. I tried using the <code> tags or my reply but that just made the formatting even worse, so I hope the <quote> ones are ok!

    I have since received the letter I missed (I cant seem to add attachments yet so it's typed out below)

    We write further to our previous Letter Before Claim sent to you dated <date> and subsequent correspondence

    As no agreement has been reached between the parties our client CP Plus Ltd has instructed us to issue county court proceedings to recover the unpaid parking charge notice after 14 days from the date of service of this letter

    Please treat this letter as the required noted pursuant to paragraph 8.2 of the Pre-Action protocol for Debt Claims

    Yours sincerely
    Is there any response that can be given to this letter, or is now everything in motion and wait the mentioned 14 days for the MCOL from Northampton CCBC?

    Thanks again for the assistance

    If there's any tips to make the formatting easier please let me know.
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 15th Apr 18, 5:58 PM
    • 2,224 Posts
    • 2,631 Thanks
    • #5
    • 15th Apr 18, 5:58 PM
    • #5
    • 15th Apr 18, 5:58 PM
    Did you look up that section to make sure it meets the requirements ? That would be an obvious step
    Another one is that if you still have areas you can narrow, if they haven't sent docs, then of course you respond pointing out their failings 7nder the pap, and state that until they have complied court action would be premature.
    • Potatini
    • By Potatini 15th Apr 18, 8:38 PM
    • 4 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    • #6
    • 15th Apr 18, 8:38 PM
    • #6
    • 15th Apr 18, 8:38 PM
    Thank you for the continued assistance

    Legal English is confusing to follow, I've looked up section 8.2 for Debt Claims here (sorry cant post links)
    and section 8.2 reads:

    8.2 Where the debtor has responded to the Letter of Claim but agreement has not
    been reached, the creditor should give the debtor at least 14 days’ notice of
    their intention to start court proceedings, unless there are exceptional
    circumstances in which urgent action is required (for example, because the
    limitation period is about to expire).
    So that seems to just be the same thing as the content of their letter, unless I've read it wrong.

    Sorry if this is too many questions, this all seems quite daunting. I think the 3 main points are below - then I can draft another response.

    In my initial letter I requested proof of the parking violation, all I received in return was the original letters with no photographic evidence of a parking infraction. Am I within my rights to demand photographic evidence of the infraction, particularly as one of the infractions was "not displaying a permit" when the permit was visible?

    Whilst the permit with a permit no & number plate was displayed on the windscreen, so far proceedings have been against me as the keeper, not the driver, so the landowner hasn't disclosed or been asked to identify me as the driver - do I have any recourse there?

    Also I requested proof that they had the authority to proceed with civil action, in response to this they only said yes they did, can I also request a copy of the documentation to back this up?

    Thanks again
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 15th Apr 18, 8:43 PM
    • 6,600 Posts
    • 5,769 Thanks
    • #7
    • 15th Apr 18, 8:43 PM
    • #7
    • 15th Apr 18, 8:43 PM
    You are looking at the wrong document.

    The Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims that came into force on 1 October 2017 is here:

    That link is in post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread.

    That new protocol talks about 30 days, and also states all the things they need to supply to you.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 16th Apr 18, 2:48 AM
    • 56,097 Posts
    • 69,760 Thanks
    • #8
    • 16th Apr 18, 2:48 AM
    • #8
    • 16th Apr 18, 2:48 AM
    Please read the NEWBIES thread second post (all about claims & defences & what to do when), it's all covered there.
    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

3,236Posts Today

4,319Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • I've decided my weekend starts here while the sun's glow is still baskable. So I'm signing off. Have a great weeke?

  • No not correct. The big six do, but you can get fixed tariffs guaranteed not to rise and about 25% cheaper. Just tr?

  • Baaaa! Scottish Power has bleated and followed the herd, today announcing it's putting up energy prices by 5.5%. R?

  • Follow Martin