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
    • thumbcrusher
    • By thumbcrusher 9th Dec 19, 11:57 AM
    • 7Posts
    • 3Thanks
    thumbcrusher
    PCN but UKPC have put incorrect VRN on ticket.
    • #1
    • 9th Dec 19, 11:57 AM
    PCN but UKPC have put incorrect VRN on ticket. 9th Dec 19 at 11:57 AM
    Friend got a ticket stuck to her car by UKPC for parking outside of a marked parking bay in a private retail carpark. The issuing warden has input "IO" instead of "10" on the ticket.

    I have gone onto UKPC website to check photos and input the ticket ref No and both the incorrect VRN and the correct VRN. Both times it states, "Unable to find parking charge" and no photos to be seen.

    I have also serached DVLA for the incorrect VRN and there is no such vehicle.

    The car owner has spoken to the retailer who owns the carpark but they refused to get the ticket cancelled.

    Normally i would send an appeal at day 26 to UKPC but do i need to on this occaision as i'm thinking they couldn't get the address of the RK? Should i just wait for her to get a NTK which may not appear if they have the wrong VRN?

    If they realised their error on the original NTD and contacted DVLA for RK details, would this be legal as it seems they have no pics of the car so it would be pure speculation on their part as to what the correct numbers were on the reg plate? (Even these numpties wouldn't find it to hard to think what the correct digits should be in this case).

    Thanks for any help!
Page 1
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 9th Dec 19, 1:24 PM
    • 16,399 Posts
    • 17,339 Thanks
    The Deep
    • #2
    • 9th Dec 19, 1:24 PM
    • #2
    • 9th Dec 19, 1:24 PM
    UKPC are fraudsters, read this

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11858473/Parking-firm-UKPC-admits-faking-tickets-to-fine-drivers.html

    Nine times out of ten these tickets are scams, so consider complaining to your MP after the election, as it can cause the scammer extra costs and work, and has been known to get the charge cancelled.

    Parliament is well aware of the MO of these private parking companies, many of whom are former clampers, and on 15th March 2019 a Bill was enacted to curb the excesses of these shysters. Codes of Practice are being drawn up, an independent appeals service will be set up, and access to the DVLA's date base more rigorously policed, persistent offenders denied access to the DVLA database and unable to operate.

    Hopefully life will become impossible for the worst of these scammers, but until this is done you should still complain to your MP, citing the new legislation.

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/enacted

    Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these Private Parking Companies.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • The Slithy Tove
    • By The Slithy Tove 9th Dec 19, 1:40 PM
    • 3,723 Posts
    • 5,676 Thanks
    The Slithy Tove
    • #3
    • 9th Dec 19, 1:40 PM
    • #3
    • 9th Dec 19, 1:40 PM
    How obviously is it an I and not a 1? These are trivial errors. Ironically, whenever a driver enters the incorrect details, substituting I/1 or 0/O, it's the end of the world and you owe them 100. But I'm sure they'll argue quite the opposite when it's them making the mistake.

    Either way, I and 1 are typographically identical on UK number plates, as are O and 0. Only if you know the standard format of our number plates can you actually tell which it is.
    • Rover Driver
    • By Rover Driver 9th Dec 19, 2:54 PM
    • 1,442 Posts
    • 666 Thanks
    Rover Driver
    • #4
    • 9th Dec 19, 2:54 PM
    • #4
    • 9th Dec 19, 2:54 PM
    Another PPC ploy is to deliberately put a slightly incorrect registration mark on the Notice To Driver, hoping that the driver will contact them about the error, and during the conversation identify themselves as the driver, which will cancel any possible defences in the Protection of Freedoms Act.
    If the PPC are not contacted, when the Notice to Keeper arrives - surprisingly it is complete with the correct registration mark!
    Last edited by Rover Driver; 09-12-2019 at 4:55 PM.
    • Fruitcake
    • By Fruitcake 9th Dec 19, 3:17 PM
    • 41,853 Posts
    • 92,767 Thanks
    Fruitcake
    • #5
    • 9th Dec 19, 3:17 PM
    • #5
    • 9th Dec 19, 3:17 PM
    As Rover Driver says, this may be a deliberate ploy by the scammers to get an unwary motorist to reveal the driver's identity.

    I would wait for the NTK. It might not arrive at all if the scammers haven't noticed the incorrect VRN. They aren't allowed to ask the DVLA for keeper details until day 28.

    If the details on the NTD and NTK are different then the scammers have failed the strict requirements of the PoFA and cannot therefore hold the keeper liable.

    If a NTK does arrive then a complaint to the DVLA and BPA should be made accordingly for obtaining keeper details without a valid reason.
    I married my cousin. I had to...
    I don't have a sister.

    All my screwdrivers are cordless.
    "You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks
    • thumbcrusher
    • By thumbcrusher 9th Dec 19, 8:08 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    thumbcrusher
    • #6
    • 9th Dec 19, 8:08 PM
    • #6
    • 9th Dec 19, 8:08 PM
    Thanks for the advice folks. I'll not appeal the NTD and instead await the NTK and appeal that instead and hopefully as you say Fruitcake, they'll !!!! it up.
    • thumbcrusher
    • By thumbcrusher 13th Jan 20, 5:50 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    thumbcrusher
    • #7
    • 13th Jan 20, 5:50 PM
    • #7
    • 13th Jan 20, 5:50 PM
    Well the NTK has arrived with the correct reg number on it suprise suprise!
    However, UKPC have added to it that, "This parking charge notice supercedes 1362******* which has been reissued".

    So, basically they realised the reg number error on the original NTD and have apparently issued a new one. How?

    Are they really trying to say the NTK is now the NTD?

    Clearly just another scam but doesn't this mean they should have waited 28 days after the "Reissued" NTD before contacting DVLA?

    Just wanting to add any extra arguments to my appeal for the RK if it'll help their case.

    Any thoughts on this one would be appreciated folks, (I've not come across this scenario on any other tickets i've dealt with).

    Thanks!
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 13th Jan 20, 6:51 PM
    • 13,326 Posts
    • 19,163 Thanks
    beamerguy
    • #8
    • 13th Jan 20, 6:51 PM
    • #8
    • 13th Jan 20, 6:51 PM
    Well the NTK has arrived with the correct reg number on it suprise suprise!
    However, UKPC have added to it that, "This parking charge notice supercedes 1362******* which has been reissued".

    So, basically they realised the reg number error on the original NTD and have apparently issued a new one. How?

    Are they really trying to say the NTK is now the NTD?

    Clearly just another scam but doesn't this mean they should have waited 28 days after the "Reissued" NTD before contacting DVLA?

    Just wanting to add any extra arguments to my appeal for the RK if it'll help their case.

    Any thoughts on this one would be appreciated folks, (I've not come across this scenario on any other tickets i've dealt with).

    Thanks!
    Originally posted by thumbcrusher
    UKPC has one stab at getting it right. If the warden got it wrong, that is the problem for UKPC

    One assumes they tried to get info from the DVLA on a reg number that the warden screwed up on

    As said, UKPC, are a big joke with their inept operation and should be reported to the BPA

    Mind you, the BPA are a huge joke in themselves. UKPC should have been kicked out of the BPA ... trouble is the BPA like their subscription fees far too much ????
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 13th Jan 20, 6:56 PM
    • 26,583 Posts
    • 43,669 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    • #9
    • 13th Jan 20, 6:56 PM
    • #9
    • 13th Jan 20, 6:56 PM
    To have any hope of holding the keeper liable, the NtK must match precisely the detail recorded on the windscreen ticket.

    In their letter to you (which they are calling a NtD) are they in any way claiming there is any liability on the keeper and referring to the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (Schedule 4)?

    If so, please tell us exactly what they have written.
    Please note, we are not a legal advice forum. I personally don't get involved in critiquing court case Defences/Witness Statements, so unable to help on that front. Please don't ask.
    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.
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 13th Jan 20, 7:19 PM
    • 13,326 Posts
    • 19,163 Thanks
    beamerguy
    I guess the BPA ARE SO OUT OF TOUCH with their membership scammers

    It's so difficult to understand why the BPA don't get it ..... their membership comprises of some of the biggest scammers in the UK

    THE BPA LOVE IT
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • twhitehousescat
    • By twhitehousescat 13th Jan 20, 9:30 PM
    • 4,546 Posts
    • 5,588 Thanks
    twhitehousescat
    thids is a case of "soft ticketing" , you have no choise but to go to there site to view incident and to see if the ticket was intended for your car

    there is no way that you can appeal as the info to do this my mail or email is wrong
    Time pretending I was asleep whilst under his desk , has given me insight to this sordid world
    • waamo
    • By waamo 13th Jan 20, 9:39 PM
    • 8,716 Posts
    • 12,162 Thanks
    waamo
    Write to them and say the fee for mistyping a VRN is 100. You are prepared to reduce it to 60 if payed within 14 days
    This space for hire.
    • youreds
    • By youreds 13th Jan 20, 10:51 PM
    • 285 Posts
    • 110 Thanks
    youreds
    Identical MO to the one I have just beaten.


    https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=76548112&posted=1#post76548112


    Go to the website & submit an 'appeal', use the wording below, nothing more, nothing less/



    You have failed to comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of The Protection Of Freedoms Act 2012 namely, but not limited to, failing to deliver the notice within the relevant period of 14 days as prescribed by section 9 (4) of the Act. You cannot, therefore, transfer liability for the alleged charge from the driver at the time to me, the keeper.

    There is no legal requirement to name the driver at the time and I will not be doing so.

    Any further communication with me on this matter, apart from confirmation of no further action and my details being removed from your records, will be considered vexatious and harassment. This includes communication from any Debt Collection companies you care to instruct.

    Around 35 days later you'll get a letter saying it's cancelled. Basically, they can't void the windscreen ticket & raise a new NTK.
    • thumbcrusher
    • By thumbcrusher 14th Jan 20, 8:43 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    thumbcrusher
    Once again thanks for the great advice folks. Really appreciate it!
    • thumbcrusher
    • By thumbcrusher 14th Jan 20, 9:18 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    thumbcrusher
    Umkomaas thanks for your help. The Letter is definately an NTK!

    It reads:-

    Dear *****

    This parking charge notice supercedes 12345******* which has been reissued.

    Re: Parking charge - Notice to keeper.

    Your vehicle was recorded on private property in breach of the following terms and conditions of parking.

    Parked in a roadway............

    The number reference they say has been superceded was the original NTD which had the incorrect reg number on it. They have then quoted a new reference number which allegedly relates to the reissued NTD.
    No other NTD was put on the vehicle nor recieved in the post.

    Hope that's clarified my explanation a bit better.
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 14th Jan 20, 10:47 PM
    • 26,583 Posts
    • 43,669 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    Umkomaas thanks for your help. The Letter is definately an NTK!

    It reads:-

    Dear *****

    This parking charge notice supercedes 12345******* which has been reissued.

    Re: Parking charge - Notice to keeper.

    Your vehicle was recorded on private property in breach of the following terms and conditions of parking.

    Parked in a roadway............

    The number reference they say has been superceded was the original NTD which had the incorrect reg number on it. They have then quoted a new reference number which allegedly relates to the reissued NTD.
    No other NTD was put on the vehicle nor recieved in the post.

    Hope that's clarified my explanation a bit better.
    Originally posted by thumbcrusher
    But are they claiming that the RK is liable under PoFA for the parking charge if the driver isn't identified? What they say in this context is critical. If you can't work your way through that, please post a link to a copy of the UKPC letter for us to look at.

    NEWBIES - HOW TO UPLOAD LINKS TO PHOTOS/SCANS TO MSE

    To upload a photo/scan link, you first need to host it on a free photo hosting site (like Dropbox or Imgur), copy the URL, paste it here, but change the http to hxxp and we'll do the conversion. Newbies can't directly upload links to photos/scans until they've a few posts under their belt.

    Please do not use TinyPic or PhotoBucket as they drop all sorts of gratuitous and unsolicited dross on computer screens when their links are opened.

    Or, read this advisory post:

    https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=72903720&postcount=7115
    Please note, we are not a legal advice forum. I personally don't get involved in critiquing court case Defences/Witness Statements, so unable to help on that front. Please don't ask.
    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.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 14th Jan 20, 11:01 PM
    • 80,692 Posts
    • 95,221 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Search the forum for UKPC supersedes (spelt with an 's' not 'c') and you will find how commonly they do this.

    In the first appeal, from the keeper online (NOT ticking driver and not letting the drop down default back to driver as it sometimes does - be alert before submitting it!) do not mention any PCN at all.

    As such, the advice from youreds is a perfect approach for these cases because UKPC won't be able to show there was a NTD in this case.
    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
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 15th Jan 20, 9:34 AM
    • 6,253 Posts
    • 8,277 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    If the NtD had the incorrect reg, there was no NtD, and they dont get to claim POFA2012 compliance as they can never meet it.
    • youreds
    • By youreds 15th Jan 20, 9:45 AM
    • 285 Posts
    • 110 Thanks
    youreds
    If the NtD had the incorrect reg, there was no NtD, and they dont get to claim POFA2012 compliance as they can never meet it.
    Originally posted by nosferatu1001
    Exactly. Use their online 'appeals' facility & it won't even cost you a stamp. Use my exact wording (credit to Ostell on Pepipoo & Legalbeagles) & they'll roll over with barely a whimper.

    What bothers me about these cases is that many times we never hear from the OP what the result was, I am sure many just pay up out of fear. I hope we hear good news from thumbcrusher in around 5 weeks time. Subscribed.
    • thumbcrusher
    • By thumbcrusher 20th Jan 20, 6:56 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    thumbcrusher
    Umkomaas hopefully here's the pertinent bit of the letter received...

    hxxps://imgur.com/7vdrLgF
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

103Posts Today

1,490Users online

Martin's Twitter