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
    • Potatini
    • By Potatini 12th Apr 18, 7:44 PM
    • 15Posts
    • 4Thanks
    Potatini
    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 2
    • Dhoney22002
    • By Dhoney22002 16th May 18, 4:33 AM
    • 29 Posts
    • 16 Thanks
    Dhoney22002
    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.
    Your case sounds so much like mine and my Trust except my Trust uses UKPC. Good luck with this. I am still in similar situation right now..... and Trust not very helpful.
    • Potatini
    • By Potatini 16th May 18, 2:10 PM
    • 15 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Potatini
    Can they actually look reasonable?
    • Potatini
    • By Potatini 10th Jun 18, 9:41 PM
    • 15 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Potatini
    Hi,
    I finally have a reply from SCS! They responded point by point to all my requests on the previous letter https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5826850#12, as follows:
    1. Their claim is contractual, they are authorised by the Trust, the vehicle is breaching the T&Cs.
    2. Their client complies to the Protection of freedoms Act 2012, hence pursuing me as keeper.
    3. The answer was "please see above".
    4. There are a number of photos as an "evidence" of the claim, at least 2 per each claim: a) One depicting the car from the front, showing their "yellow slip" on the windscreen, the dashboard is partly visible (since the angle of shot) and there's a very minimal view of the location (in some pics only the car is visible. b) Another one depicting the n. plate only.
    5. There is a letter on CP Plus headed paper attached, in which the Trust authorises the contractor to take "action in respect of all unpaid parking charges in the name of the contractor".
    6. There is a photo focused on one of the signs that is presumably at site. Such picture completely fails to show any surroundings to show where the sign may be.
    7. They state each charge was £40, to with they've added £40 "as by signage" (on the sign in the attached photo is stated that parking charges "not paid within the given period may incur in additional charges".
    8. Their answer is "see paragraph 4 above".
    At the end they reiterate I am liable as a keeper, as per POFA 4(1), as I haven't disclosed the driver's details and that my vehicle was clearly breaching the T&C indicated on the signage on site, hence they still expect me to pay the "owing".

    I didn't expect them to be so articulate in their reply.
    I scanned the forum for further ways of handling, but I think I've written most of the suggestions in my previous two letters. Next life I'm a lawyer!!!
    What's best to do now? Any recommendations would be cherished.
    Thank you!
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 10th Jun 18, 9:56 PM
    • 59,409 Posts
    • 72,563 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I didn't expect them to be so articulate in their reply.
    Well they are a law firm, of sorts, so someone can write a decent sentence.

    Seen it all before, any old 'Head of Legal' Neanderthal thug from any old firms (solicitor firms et al, naming no names, not specifically SCS here in case they get shirty!) can write in legalese, but it doesn't mean they will win cases or are the cleverest person in the room.

    Their client complies to the Protection of freedoms Act 2012, hence pursuing me as keeper.
    CP Plus generally don't comply when they post a NTK (with no windscreen PCN first) but I assume that your windscreen PCNs were followed by NTKs issued by 'PCS' (aka Debt Recovery Plus), who do make a stab at the required POFA wording. So they might be able to argue that.

    You said earlier:
    one of the infractions was "not displaying a permit" when the permit was visible?
    So does the latest photo evidence show that permit, or have they withheld a photo or two? What is missing do you think?

    If not, let them try a claim if they so decide and we will help you to defend it.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 10-06-2018 at 9:59 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.

    • Potatini
    • By Potatini 10th Jun 18, 10:17 PM
    • 15 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Potatini
    Hi #CouponMad, thanks for replying so quickly.
    The photos attached represent my car from the front, hence the disc permit is visible in most pictures. In the first occurrence only the disc permit is not visible and this is because it was on the dashboard (to my knowledge, the reason is the car was booked in for windscreen chip repair/change).
    The angle of the photo also does not clearly or completely show the dashboard flat bit, which was on that instance very useful to them, so they could claim there was no "today" dated scratch card, when I'm sure it would have been displayed correctly.
    Two photos "prove" my vehicle was park outside the designated bays, in an ample area where the car was of no obstruction whatsoever. In one of the two "parking outside the designated bay" occurrences, my car was parked inside what used to be a white line, that has been painted over/cancelled AND this is visible in their photo.
    My questions are: how can we tell where he photos were taken? Most represent no surrounding. And how did my vehicle enter a restricted area, accessible only with valid permit, when they claim the permit wasn't shown?
    Last edited by Potatini; 10-06-2018 at 10:22 PM. Reason: clarifications
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 10th Jun 18, 10:59 PM
    • 59,409 Posts
    • 72,563 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    You don't need to answer those questions; the PPC will have to, in court submissions.

    Or, send them a LBC for, say, £750 damages for harassment and data misuse, citing the fact that you have primacy of contract (a right of way and right to park) in the form of permission from the landowner and the permit is clearly visible in their evidence. They had no reasonable cause to obtain your data in one or more of the 'parking charge' events cited, have issued predatory and unjustified tickets and you suspect the ticketer was untrained in the BPA Code of Practice because the photos are diabolical as evidence. Thus, CP Plus have been processing data illegally (in breach of the DPA and now in breach of the GDPR) and have already been clearly told that this harassment has caused significant and serious distress.

    Use those words.

    If you fancy that fightback, then you'd have to be serious about lodging a claim, which costs a small sum in court fees up front, for £750 claim (Google small claim fees) and you then add that fee to the claim.

    Can be done:

    http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2017/05/motorist-awarded-900-for-data.html

    You might feel more comfortable striking before they do, and in your case you have already fairly warned their solicitor about the distress caused and the facts re the permit, and their own evidence shows that permit was at all material times displayed for inspection and they have failed to evidence where the signs are in relation to the car.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 10-06-2018 at 11:04 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.

    • Potatini
    • By Potatini 11th Jun 18, 6:50 PM
    • 15 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Potatini
    Hi again and thanks a lot for your precious support.
    The idea of taking them to court makes me very nervous.
    I don't think I have the knowledge to defend myself in front of a judge. Plus it seems quite costly.
    Would you say this is my best option? Do you have another strategy in mind?
    Or do you think it would be of any use, if I reply with the above, stating I will have to claim for my personal damages as part of my defence, if they take me to court. (can this be done in the same court summons?)
    It's not that I want to pay, but I don't want to end up worse off. This issue is really wearing me down and I'm loosing the will to fight.
    I'm looking forward to any further advice.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 12th Jun 18, 2:08 AM
    • 59,409 Posts
    • 72,563 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    The idea of taking them to court makes me very nervous.
    I don't think I have the knowledge to defend myself in front of a judge. Plus it seems quite costly.
    Why would you as claimant, be defending yourself?

    How is it costly?!

    court summons?
    What Summons? It's not a criminal matter!

    It's not that I want to pay, but I don't want to end up worse off.
    How will that happen, do you imagine? These PCNs are a very low £40 a pop, with an arguable £40 added on for no reason at all. Hardly massive money and even if a poster on this forum (VERY RARELY) loses a defended case here, they don't pay more than the likes of SCS have invented already!

    Whatever they are begging for now is no different than the 'risk' in court, so why would anyone think about just paying the daft amount demanded without fighting it properly, when we see 99% of cases won here?

    Would you rather wait for them to sue you, then defend? That's fine, we almost always see ordinary people like you (very nervous and inexperienced, non-legal minded) win. But yes, you would have to defend yourself in front of a Judge!
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 12-06-2018 at 2:13 AM.
    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.

    • Potatini
    • By Potatini 13th Jun 18, 6:47 PM
    • 15 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Potatini
    As demonstrated, my knowledge is quite poor, although I'm trying my best here!
    But before we even get close to court calls, is there a way I can get back to their letter to deter them?
    I think I've asked anything I found on various posts on the forum.
    Short of reiterating that I'm being harassed, and that their photos are completely insufficient as a proof, can you think of other strategies?
    Thanks for your support
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 13th Jun 18, 7:05 PM
    • 7,983 Posts
    • 7,845 Thanks
    KeithP
    I do not believe there is anything more you can do to deter them.

    My suggestion is to sit back and wait patiently for a Claim Form to drop through your letterbox.
    .
    • Potatini
    • By Potatini 14th Jun 18, 7:58 PM
    • 15 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Potatini

    Thanks, I'll try not to over-stress in the wait!
    Unless anyone of the kind experts out there has a sparkle for a good reply, I'll keep you posted.
    Thank you for the advice and all the help so far.
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

1,152Posts Today

8,576Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @thismorning: Worried about your finances? Want tips and tricks for getting the best money-saving deals? Whatever your money matter, @Ma?

  • Morning. I'm on my way to @thismorning first to talk about how to get the most buck (or euros) for your money with? https://t.co/OXkQDilixy

  • Early days but if we weight this vote to the referendum proportions (48:52) then 57% of people currently want secon? https://t.co/zct2KOUWRf

  • Follow Martin