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
    • sickofpcn
    • By sickofpcn 9th Nov 18, 11:01 PM
    • 7Posts
    • 0Thanks
    sickofpcn
    CE Ltd PCN Appeals
    • #1
    • 9th Nov 18, 11:01 PM
    CE Ltd PCN Appeals 9th Nov 18 at 11:01 PM
    Hi All,

    I have also received a parking charge notice from Ce-Services for parking in at Holiday inn express Birmingham on 28th of September which i have just found in post couple of days ago which has now already past 14 and 28 days period i think.

    A friend of min came from India and he was staying at Holiday in express we went out for a dinner on the way back he asked me to drop him to his hotel i went to drop him and he asked me come in as he wanted to show me some samples so we were there at reception area for about an hour without knowing any parking restrictions in place and now i have received 100/60 PCN.

    Can anyone help me avoid this, how can i appeal against, do i have a valid case, could i say my friend asked me to drop him or borrowed my car etc?
Page 1
    • sickofpcn
    • By sickofpcn 9th Nov 18, 11:03 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    sickofpcn
    • #2
    • 9th Nov 18, 11:03 PM
    • #2
    • 9th Nov 18, 11:03 PM
    I have submitted my response Below to CE-Service by using a template available on one of the forum

    Re: PCN No. @@@@@@@@@@

    I am writing to appeal the above PCN sent to me as the registered keeper of the above vehicle, I was not the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged infringement.

    As you do not appear to have identified the driver at the time of the alleged infringement, it is assumed that your company intends to rely on the keeper liability provisions of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA).

    Schedule 4 Paragraphs 8 & 9 of the PoFA stipulate the mandatory information that must be included in a Notice to Keeper (NTK), in order for it to be valid. Amongst many other requirements, it stipulates that the NTK must:

    !!!61607; Advise that the driver is responsible for the parking charge and the amount, and that it has not been paid in full.

    Unfortunately, your company has failed to provide the above information on the NTK and therefore it fails to meet the requirements of Paragraph 6 Schedule 4 of the PoFA in establishing keeper liability.

    It is acknowledged that your company provided the required information on the payment slip enclosed with your NTK, however, the High Court ruled in the case of Barnet Council v The Parking Adjudicator 2006 EWHC 2357 that the payment slip constitutes a separate document to the notice to owner. This decision is binding on all lower courts and ombudsman services, including the County Court and POPLA.

    As you have failed to establish keeper liability under the PoFA, I will not be making any payment in respect of this PCN. Your alleged contract is with the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged infringement, and I am afraid that I am unable to assist you with identifying the driver on the specified date and time.

    Please ensure that your reply includes a notice of cancellation of the above PCN.

    Yours sincerely,
    • sickofpcn
    • By sickofpcn 9th Nov 18, 11:09 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    sickofpcn
    • #3
    • 9th Nov 18, 11:09 PM
    • #3
    • 9th Nov 18, 11:09 PM
    Can anyone advice me if i have done the right thing?
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 10th Nov 18, 9:44 AM
    • 10,610 Posts
    • 10,442 Thanks
    The Deep
    • #4
    • 10th Nov 18, 9:44 AM
    • #4
    • 10th Nov 18, 9:44 AM
    This decision is binding on all lower courts and ombudsman services, including the County Court and POPLA.

    That should give them pause for thought. Are you aware of the goings on in the House of Commons?

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

    Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, and others have already been named and shamed in the House of Commons as have Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each week, hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned. They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

    The problem has become so widespread that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. It has even been suggested that some of these companies have links with organised crime.

    Watch the video of the Second Reading and committee stage in the House of Commons recently. MPs have a very low opinion of this industry.

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

    https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2018-07-19/debates/2b90805c-bff8-4707-8bdc-b0bfae5a7ad5/Parking(CodeOfPractice)Bill(FirstSitting)

    and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind they will be out of business by in the not too distant future..
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 10th Nov 18, 10:30 AM
    • 20,255 Posts
    • 31,952 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    • #5
    • 10th Nov 18, 10:30 AM
    • #5
    • 10th Nov 18, 10:30 AM
    It is acknowledged that your company provided the required information on the payment slip enclosed with your NTK, however, the High Court ruled in the case of Barnet Council v The Parking Adjudicator 2006 EWHC 2357 that the payment slip constitutes a separate document to the notice to owner. This decision is binding on all lower courts and ombudsman services, including the County Court and POPLA.
    I'm not sure whether there's a read-across to private parking or not. I'm not trying to undermine your point, but I've not seen this argued here before. Will be interesting to see what POPLA make of this if it gets that far.
    Please note, we are not a legal, residential or credit advice forum, rather one that helps motorists fight private parking charges, primarily at the 'front-end' of the process.
    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 10th Nov 18, 11:15 AM
    • 10,610 Posts
    • 10,442 Thanks
    The Deep
    • #6
    • 10th Nov 18, 11:15 AM
    • #6
    • 10th Nov 18, 11:15 AM
    If I were the PPC, I would tread very carefully here. The OP is either a very good con man, or knows his/her legal onions.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • sickofpcn
    • By sickofpcn 10th Nov 18, 10:17 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    sickofpcn
    • #7
    • 10th Nov 18, 10:17 PM
    • #7
    • 10th Nov 18, 10:17 PM
    I have forwarded previous template to CE LTD but today i have received another letter in post which was obviously sent before my response as the date on the letter is 6th of November and it is as it follows!

    I know it might be to early to respond but i would want some one to to advice me on this please.


    Date: 06/11/2018
    Vehicle Registration: XXXX XXX
    PCN Reference: XXXXXXXXX
    Date of Incident: 28/09/2018 ( Parked in breach of Terms & Conditions)
    Site Details: Holiday inn Express

    TO MAKE PAYMENT CALL 0113 822 5020 / VISIT WW.CE-SERVICES.CO.UK


    LETTER OF NOTIFICATION REGARDING KEEPERS LIABILITY

    Dear Sir/ Madam,

    It has been over 30 days since the above Parking Charge Notice (PCN) has been issued to you and debt remains unpaid.

    Therefore, in accordance with schedule 4 of the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 as the Registered Keeper of the above vehicle, You are now liable for the full amount outstanding for this PCN for the reasons listed below.

    You have failed to provide us with any information as requested by the Notice to Keeper; Or
    You have failed to provide the full, correct name of the driver and their current address fro service
    You have identified someone who has denied being the driver at the time of the parking event mentioned above or has not responded at the address provided; or
    You are a Hire or Leasing company and have not provided the full documentation and information required by the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 in order us to transfer liability for this Parking Charge Notice.

    Payments can be made by calling xxxxxxxxxxxxxx via our website on xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx or by sending a cheque or postal order to Civil Enforcement Ltd,xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxx xxxx

    Please note that the IAS ( Independednt Appeal Service) is no longer available at this stage.

    Unless full payment is received within 14 days we will be left with no alternative but to instruct third party collection agents to start the debt recovery process. Further Costs May be incurred
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 10th Nov 18, 10:25 PM
    • 63,935 Posts
    • 76,567 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #8
    • 10th Nov 18, 10:25 PM
    • #8
    • 10th Nov 18, 10:25 PM
    I would just wait for a reply to your appeal.

    I have seen this before, a while back:
    It is acknowledged that your company provided the required information on the payment slip enclosed with your NTK, however, the High Court ruled in the case of Barnet Council v The Parking Adjudicator 2006 EWHC 2357 that the payment slip constitutes a separate document to the notice to owner. This decision is binding on all lower courts and ombudsman services, including the County Court and POPLA.
    Here:

    http://forums.pepipoo.com/lofiversion/index.php/t119522.html

    and nosferatu1001 added:

    nosferatu1001
    Wed, 28 Mar 2018 - 15:25


    The entire POINT is that they cannot put POFA required wording on the payment slip - because the payment slip is NOT the NtK, despite being attached to it. the High Court has ruled on this, it is binding on lower courts, so they would lose at small claims.
    and CEL cancelled the PCN - course they did!
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT UNLESS IN SCOTLAND OR NI
    TWO Clicks needed Look up, top of the page:
    Main site>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
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

2,509Posts Today

8,894Users online

Martin's Twitter