|
|
Post by jaybee on Oct 30, 2014 22:40:46 GMT
Councils and police......pay the fine. Every fucker else hasn't got a prayer. Ignore For the third time  you must *not* ignore it. |
|
|
|
Post by BuzzB on Oct 30, 2014 22:55:30 GMT
They all deserve a fine for parking there. FFS Tazi take a chill pill, its not quite Grinch season yet. First Hughsie now the car parkers  |
|
|
|
Post by tazi on Oct 30, 2014 22:59:00 GMT
They all deserve a fine for parking there. FFS Tazi take a chill pill, its not quite Grinch season yet. First Hughsie now the car parkers So it's ok to park all over the grass verges?. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2014 23:18:08 GMT
An obligatory health warning that I'm not a qualified lawyer, blah blah blah, I'm just a right mean 'see you next tuesday' when it comes to these kinda things...
I assume that everybody has got the same PCN from UKPS (UK Parking Solutions), at the location: 'Prologis Sideway Land' and the reason of issue being 'Obstructive Parking'.
The PCN itself can be absolutely torn apart on several fronts. But, it's far better to write to them and do so as the registered keeper rather than the driver. Doing so as the registered keeper absolutely requires the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, and there are several breaches of Section 4 of that Act in the PCN...
As they have opted to go down the route of 'driver' (by affixing the PCN to the vehicle at the time), they can only come after the keeper within the 28 days period AFTER 28 days from the date of the PCN itself.
The conditions of the PCN are that, if payment hasnt been made within 28 days, they may get the vehicle keepers details from DVLA and may be followed by further enforcement action... That 'keepers details' then invokes Section 4; and that 'further enforcement' can only then take place after another 28 days, but the keeper has the same right of appeal as the driver.
They will not (and now can not) add any further charges until 'further enforcement action' is instigated, 28 days after the notice to keeper sent (which is 28 days after the notice to driver - ie; parking charge notice is issued).
Under any form of collection activity, no debt collectors can be appointed until you have been given a friendly warning then a final warning etc. ect., so dont worry about that because, quite simply, they don't have the evidence of the driver. So, that only leaves them with the notice to keepers route.
To enforce this, the notice to driver itself must have been correct - and it isn't, far from. The notice to keeper must also be the same, so that's not going to be correct either.
If it was me, I'd wait for the notice to keeper to be sent through (and this must only be 28 days after the event otherwise that itself is another breach) and then tear it apart afterwards. In that time, I'll be happy to draft a letter and send it to anybody who wants it. PLEASE do this by PM though instead of just replying on here to make sure that I get everybody.
Of course, this is completely up to you if you want to be a bit brave and go for it (and please do your own research too...)
|
|
|
|
Post by Ayupshag on Oct 30, 2014 23:35:09 GMT
I agree that they are cunts for putting parking charges on cars when not enough parking was provided when they built the stadium, however, is it not just easier to park elsewhere where there are no parking restrictions? Fenton has a load of space where you can park and walk 15 mins to the ground.
They've been putting tickets on cars down sideway for years so why people still insist on causing chaos down there by parking on the grass and nearly running people over by trying to rush off after the game is beyond me
|
|
|
|
Post by AlbertTatlock on Oct 31, 2014 12:03:13 GMT
FFS Tazi take a chill pill, its not quite Grinch season yet. First Hughsie now the car parkers So it's ok to park all over the grass verges?. Yes it fucking well is! It's a grass verge not an entrance to a hospital or school. When this wankstain of a council start to maintain the grass verges then might people start to think twice about parking on them and causing any sort of damage. If they're not the property of the council then the owners of the verges need to maintain them also and maybe even police them if they don't want anyone to park on them, As for the fucking parking police saying that they are causing "obstruction" by parking there then please explain what this "obstruction" is. Gouranga.  |
|
meatus
Academy Starlet
Posts: 189
|
Post by meatus on Oct 31, 2014 12:40:09 GMT
the usual "health warning" applies but if you want a fight: use the UKPS appeal process - it will get thrown out; then appeal to POPLA (Parking on Private Land Appeals) on the grounds that the charge is a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss (GPEOL). The cost of the appeal is borne by UKPS if you don't want the stress and worry then www.parkingticketappeals.org.uk/ will sort it out for £16 - a huge saving on UKPS's speculative invoice As previously posted, lots of helpful stuff on the Parking Prankster blog parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/Do let us know what happens! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2014 12:58:46 GMT
Don't even need to appeal. Appealing would be based on having sufficient information to make accurate representation based on the facts of the alleged matter and quite simply, they dont have it.
I'd wait until the notice to keeper and then send the following:
RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE TO KEEPER
I write to you as the registered keeper of vehicle registration xxxx xxx in regards to the UK Parking Solutions (UKPS) Parking Charge Notice (PCN) Reference number 999999999 and the ‘notice to keeper’ received. Please note that I write to you solely as the registered keeper of the vehicle and such references to myself are as the registered keeper of the vehicle. Under no circumstances do I write to you as the driver for any alleged matter.
I have obtained as the keeper of the vehicle the notice to driver as well as your notice to keeper and the following are matters related to this notice:
1) The notice to driver does not specify the period of parking to which the notice relates. As such, the notice is in breach of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (herein referred to as ‘the Act’), Schedule 4, sub-paragraph 7(2)(a);
2) Further or alternatively, the notice to driver does not specify the Creditor for the purpose of the notice. As such, the notice is in breach of Schedule 4, sub-paragraph 7(2)(e) of the Act and fails to satisfy the definition of “the creditor” under paragraph 2(1).
You have therefore failed immediately to meet the necessary requirements of paragraphs 4, 6 and 7 of Schedule 4 of the Act and the notice is therefore deemed invalid and void. You have further completely failed to provide any reasonable level of information on which any person could make a fair and accurate representation based on fact and specific allegation.
No further requests made to the keeper will therefore be entertained, and you hereby agree to provide payment of £500 to myself should you continue to do so in breach of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.
thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by chayzenbacon on Oct 31, 2014 13:08:58 GMT
Copied & posted to an MS Word document to be used if ever I or friends/family should ever need it. Well done Stan.
|
|
|
|
Post by redstriper on Oct 31, 2014 13:47:13 GMT
I drove down from chester for this one and I got a ticket for parking on the grass verge in white rock road by the sainsburys depot. It from the city council. I will have to pay it, but just wondering if (as it's the first time I'd parked there as I usually leave the car at my mates in oakhill and he drives) whether they ticket people every week for verge parking or whether I was really unlucky ?
|
|
|
|
Post by redstriper on Oct 31, 2014 14:44:29 GMT
update; followed the instruction to go to SOT website to pay...
menu option they suggest - doesn't exist.
if you click on on road parking fine - the site just hangs...
feckin useless....yet I will be fined if I don't pay.
|
|
|
|
Post by RF10 on Oct 31, 2014 15:50:24 GMT
I drove down from chester for this one and I got a ticket for parking on the grass verge in white rock road by the sainsburys depot. It from the city council. I will have to pay it, but just wondering if (as it's the first time I'd parked there as I usually leave the car at my mates in oakhill and he drives) whether they ticket people every week for verge parking or whether I was really unlucky ? If it's from the council you will have to pay it probably. The ones discussed are a different area which is around the back of the canal. NOT on a main road. I have parked there for 2 years and had no issue previously. |
|
|
|
Post by jarvinski on Oct 31, 2014 17:19:59 GMT
I got done last year at snowdon, it's a con tell them to shove it, it is a private company just the same as it is at the hospital and the supermarkets, tell em all to fuck off
|
|
|
|
Post by nott1 on Oct 31, 2014 18:27:09 GMT
If someone left a sticker on my window that said "Parking fine", i'd send a letter back saying thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Oct 31, 2014 18:34:39 GMT
Easy solution, don't park where you're not meant to.
|
|
|
|
Post by scfcwebby on Oct 31, 2014 19:30:34 GMT
If someone left a sticker on my window that said "Parking fine", i'd send a letter back saying thanks. The old ones are the best  |
|
|
|
Post by Widget123 on Oct 31, 2014 22:26:09 GMT
I drove down from chester for this one and I got a ticket for parking on the grass verge in white rock road by the sainsburys depot. It from the city council. I will have to pay it, but just wondering if (as it's the first time I'd parked there as I usually leave the car at my mates in oakhill and he drives) whether they ticket people every week for verge parking or whether I was really unlucky ? Is it a official council ticket? If it is it needs to meet a bunch of criteria too. I over turned a bus lane ticket earlier in the year as the councils documents didn't meet regulations. Drop me an email and I can point you towards some experts on the council side of things. |
|
|
|
Post by redstriper on Nov 1, 2014 11:48:32 GMT
I drove down from chester for this one and I got a ticket for parking on the grass verge in white rock road by the sainsburys depot. It from the city council. I will have to pay it, but just wondering if (as it's the first time I'd parked there as I usually leave the car at my mates in oakhill and he drives) whether they ticket people every week for verge parking or whether I was really unlucky ? Is it a official council ticket? If it is it needs to meet a bunch of criteria too. I over turned a bus lane ticket earlier in the year as the councils documents didn't meet regulations. Drop me an email and I can point you towards some experts on the council side of things. Dunna worry George, I paid it, got too much on my plate at the moment to remember fight them over a few quid! |
|
|
|
Post by jaybee on Nov 1, 2014 21:59:28 GMT
If anyone got a ticket for "Prologis Sideway land", then I took a couple of pictures of the signs today
As you enter the 'site' there is a sign saying 'No Parking on the Yellow Lines - see notices for further details'
The second one says 'No Parking on the Pavements - No Parking on the yellow lines'
Just a few thoughts on this 2nd one -
The sign was on the opposite side of the road to where my car was parked
There is no pavement, it's just a massive piece of grass/waste land - I just googled pavement in the dictionary = a hard surface for pedestrians, a paved surface
Pah - they can stick their £60/100!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 2, 2014 8:05:59 GMT
When you write in to appeal, do not put a stamp on the letter, that way they will have to pay the postage if they want to, in fact just send a load of empty envelopes to them...
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2014 13:38:15 GMT
Just to keep this going a bit...
From the photo's, the signs state that the piece of land is a carpark when, in fact, it is clearly not. As such, whilst the DVLA can provide details to landowners to get addresses - they should not have issued any parking fine if the land is not designated as a car park!!
|
|
|
|
Post by dirtygary69 on Nov 3, 2014 14:45:22 GMT
Send them fecal matter through the post. That's what the cunts really deserve.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2014 15:39:21 GMT
Send them fecal matter through the post. That's what the cunts really deserve. And taking shanghaipotters idea into account....they can pay the postage as well  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2014 16:07:27 GMT
Send them fecal matter through the post. That's what the cunts really deserve. And taking shanghaipotters idea into account....they can pay the postage as well Whats Dickies view on all this malarky Ambassador? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2014 16:42:34 GMT
And taking shanghaipotters idea into account....they can pay the postage as well Whats Dickies view on all this malarky Ambassador? Dickie has given UKPS and the parking tickets the two fingers..... and tells them PISS OFF!  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2014 16:49:59 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2014 17:21:34 GMT
Whats Dickies view on all this malarky Ambassador? Dickie has given UKPS and the parking tickets the two fingers..... and tells them PISS OFF! I think he's put his point across in a very well structured, professional manner,even if it does have a hint of sitting on the fence |
|
|
|
Post by potterglen on Dec 23, 2014 17:06:01 GMT
Anyone else received demand for £100 parking charge notice?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2014 17:26:59 GMT
Anyone else received demand for £100 parking charge notice? Assuming you've got the same bollocks as a another one of the posters... I have received a ‘Notice to Keeper or Hirer’ dated 17/12/2014 from TNS Parking Services regarding an alleged Parking Charge Notice (letter received on 22/12/2014). The alleged PCN number is xxxxxx (although no copy of this has been provided with the notice). I have not received any communication from UK Parking Solutions to advise that you were appointing any third party to act upon your behalf; and therefore concerned that my details as registered keeper have been passed to third parties without notification. All reference to yourselves include, as necessary, any third party appointment you have made without notification on this matter. As the keeper of the vehicle, I do not accept the claim for the alleged parking charge. All references to any incident are alleged only as there is absolutely no support information or evidence within the notice to keeper to prove the charges are correct and/or enforceable. The notice to keeper does not provide any details with regards to: ? The period of parking which the notice relates to; ? A statement that a notice to driver was issued; ? The circumstances in which the requirement to pay the charge arose and other facts that made those charges payable; ? The time which the notice to driver was given; ? Whether the Creditor does or does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for services for the keeper. In fact, in absence of the above, I simply cannot determine exactly when this alleged incident occurred or what it was even for – so certainly cannot accept a charge of £100. Indeed, you completely fail to mention that the notice to keeper was issued in relation to the Protection of Freedoms Act (2012) Schedule 4 (herein referred to as PoFA); and it is only though my own knowledge that I have been able to assess your claim against any legal framework. The failure to provide the information detailed above is a clear breach of Paragraphs 8(2)(a); 8(2)(c) (included references to 7(2)(b) and 7(2)(f)); 8(2)(e) and 8(3). In failing to serve the notice to keeper in accordance with Paragraphs 7 and 8; this fails to meet the requirements of paragraph 6 and the keeper cannot be pursued under paragraph 4 of the PoFA. As you are a member of the British Parking Association (BPA), I have also evaluated your notice to keeper in accordance with their Code of Practice (CoP). The CoP defines the notice to keeper itself as being that which meets the conditions in Paragraphs 8 or 9 of the PoFA. This has not been done so and is therefore a breach of the CoP by default in breaching the PoFA. Para 20.2 of the CoP confirms that the conditions of the PoFA are strict in their nature. Paragraph 18.1 of the CoP identifies that “A driver who uses your private car park with your permission does so under a licence or contract with you. If they park without your permission this will usually be an act of trespass”. However, without meeting the requirements of the PoFA, it is entirely unknown what the incident actually refers to. Paragraph 19.5 of the CoP confirms that the parking charge must be based on the genuine pre-estimate of loss suffered by the landowner. The BPA do not expect this amount to be more than £100 and must be justified by operators if it exceeds this amount. Paragraph 19.6 also advises that the charge cannot be punitive or unreasonable. It appears, however, that a charge of £100 has indeed been set more as a punitive charge and to maximise revenue for a privately operated parking management company – rather than being set at any form of genuine pre-estimate of loss to the owner; and the charge attempted to be recovered from the keeper is therefore in breach of the BPA CoP. Para 20.14 of the CoP also requires the inclusion of information telling the keeper the “reasonable cause” for asking the DVLA for keepers details. Whilst I find reference to an alleged ‘parking incident’; the notice completely fails to explain what that incident relates to and is therefore considered a further breach of the CoP. Para 22.2 of the CoP requires a parking charge notice must detail the arrangements for resolving complaints, challenges or appeals. The parking charge notice itself was not included with the notice to keeper; and the notice to keeper referred back to UK Parking Solutions only. No actual details were given regarding the complaints, challenges or appeals process and is therefore considered a further breach of the Code of Practice. To summarise, UK Parking Solutions are considered to be: ? In multiple breaches of the Protection of Freedom Act (2012), Schedule 4; ? In multiple breaches of the British Parking Association Code of Practice; ? Seeking punitive amounts which do not at all reflect any genuine pre-estimate of loss to the owner. I will not therefore entertain any claim for the amounts for the alleged incident and the alleged charge must be immediately withdrawn. If the alleged charge is not withdrawn and I am required to spend further time dealing with this matter (when it clearly contains multiple breaches of the PoFA and the BPA CoP and is under no circumstance deemed to be enforceable); then I politely and reasonably request your cooperation in providing: ? Strict proof thereof that the notice to keeper is fully compliant; ? The contract which is deemed to have been breached; ? Layout plans and details of the car park; ? Evidence of your appointment by the land owner; ? Confirmation of when the keepers details were requested from the DVLA; ? A schedule of the signs provided in the car park along with details of any checks that were undertaken prior to the alleged parking incident; ? The fully supported and substantiated pre-estimate of loss which totals exactly £100. If, however, this information is not reasonably provided or the alleged charges are not withdrawn without reason; I will raise a formal complaint over any continued pursuit to the British Parking Association on the basis that you are clearly non-compliant with its requirements and the PoFA; and will charge a non-negotiable £50 per communication required plus other direct costs incurred. I will not accept any liability for any costs which you decide to incur if you fail to do so. Yours sincerely |
|
|
|
Post by tazi on Dec 23, 2014 17:52:00 GMT
Who got the parking fine.......N'Zonzi?.
|
|
you must *not* ignore it.
