DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 58998--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PARKING CHARGE - BURNLEY BIRTH CENTRE BURNLEY HOSPITAL
DIR By: nothavingthis
Date: February 20, 2025, 6:09 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi all,
I have just received an outcome for POPLA and unfortunately the
appeal has been unsuccessful on this occasion.
Decision
Unsuccessful
Assessor Name
Stuart Lumsden
Assessor summary of operator case
The operator has issued the parking charge notice (PCN) due to
no valid pay and display ticket.
Assessor summary of your case
The appellant has raised the following points from their grounds
of appeal: • The windscreen notice is a Notice to Driver (NTD)
and the Notice to Keeper (NTK) was premature as the operator
must wait 28 days before issuing a NTK after issuing the NTD. •
The NTK does not comply with PoFA. • UKPC have not proved the
the individual being pursued is the driver. • The operator has
breached the BPA Code of Practice due to inadequate signage and
as such, no contract can be formed. • There is no evidence of
landowner authority. The appellant has provided the following as
evidence to support their appeal: • A copy of a notice attached
to the windscreen. The above evidence will be considered in
making our determination.
Assessor supporting rational for decision
POPLA is a single stage appeal service, we are impartial and
independent of the sector. We consider the evidence provided by
both parties to assess whether the PCN has been issued correctly
by the parking operator and to determine if the driver has
complied with the terms and conditions for the use of the car
park or site. Our remit only extends to allowing or refusing an
appeal. I acknowledge the appellants grounds of appeal and
evidence provided of a note attached to their windscreen
advising they will be sent a PCN through the post. I appreciate
the wallet it was encased in, but it is not a Notice to Driver,
it’s just an advisory notice explaining a PCN will be sent. It
does not breach any code or PoFA as it is not a NTD. I
acknowledge no driver details have been provided and as such, I
need to establish if the operator has complied with the
requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) 2012. For
the operator to transfer liability for unpaid parking charges
from the driver of the vehicle to the registered keeper of the
vehicle, the regulations laid out in PoFA must be adhered to.
PoFA schedule 4, is a piece of legislation which enables
operators to pursue the keeper of a vehicle when they do not
have the drivers name or contact details. I have reviewed the
PCN and note that the breach occurred on 18th September 2024,
and the PCN was issued on 20th September 2024, well within 14
days specified in PoFA. The Notice to Keeper goes on to state
that if after 28 days the full amount has not been paid and they
do not know the name and address of the driver, they have the
right to purse the registered keeper. It also instructs the
keeper to pass the notice to the driver. As such, I must
conclude that the operator has complied with the requirements of
PoFA. As the operator is relying on PoFA, they do not need to
demonstrate who was driving as they can hold the keeper liable,
which is the appellant. The parking operator is a member of the
British Parking Association (BPA) and must comply with it’s Code
of Practice which sets out minimum guidelines for private
parking operators. Section 19.3 of the Code relates to specific
terms signs and states: Specific parking-terms signage tells
drivers what your terms and conditions are, including your
parking charges. You must place signs containing the specific
parking terms throughout the site, so that drivers are given the
chance to read them at the time of parking or leaving their
vehicle. Keep a record of where all the signs are. Signs must be
conspicuous and legible, and written in intelligible language,
so that they are easy to see, read and understand. I have
reviewed the parking operators evidence pack, and it has
provided date stamped images of signs throughout the site next
to the appellants vehicle. The signs advise that motorists must
display a valid pay and display ticket. The operator has
provided images of the appellants vehicle parked on site without
a ticket on display. As the operator has shown that clear and
compliant signs are in place and was next to the appellants
vehicle, they have demonstrated that they have fully complied
with the code of practice above. It’s always the responsibility
of the driver to review the signs once parked and comply with
the terms and conditions. As no pay and display ticket was on
display, I must conclude that the PCN was issued correctly. I
note the driver has questioned landowner authority and as such,
I have reviewed the document provided. Section 7.1 of the Code
of Practice relates to written authorisation and states: If you
do not own the land on which you are carrying out parking
management, you must have the written authorisation of the
landowner (or their appointed agent). The written confirmation
must be given before you can start operating on the land in
question and give you the authority to carry out all the aspects
of car park management for the site that you are responsible
for. In particular, it must say that the landowner (or their
appointed agent) requires you to keep to the Code of Practice
and that you have the authority to pursue outstanding parking
charges. The operator has provided a copy of the landowner
agreement which stipulates the land in question, the date of the
agreement from 2012 for an initial 12 month period and is also
signed by both parties. As signs were clearly still visible and
in place at the time of the breach, I find this more than
suitable to demonstrate the operator has authority to issue
PCN’s on site. After considering the evidence, I can see that
the terms of parking were made clear, and that the driver broke
them by failing to display a valid pay and display ticket. I am
satisfied that the PCN was issued correctly and refuse this
appeal. Any questions relating to payment of the parking charge
should be directed to the operator.
#Post#: 59050--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PARKING CHARGE - BURNLEY BIRTH CENTRE BURNLEY HOSPITAL
DIR By: b789
Date: February 20, 2025, 10:18 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Never mind. Their decision is not binding on you and has no
bearing on anything going forwards. Do not pay anything.
Did you not receive a copy of the operators evidence pack at
some stage after you submitted the POPLA appeal? If so, why did
you bot show us? Did you respond to the operators evidence pack?
This POPLA assessor has a bit of a reputation for being ignorant
in most matters of contract law and I have already drafted a few
formal complaints about his flawed decision making and obvious
lack of sufficient contract law knowledge.
This is what is going to happen next... you will receive a bunch
of useless Debt Recovery Agent (DRA) letters which you can
safely ignore. They are powerless except to try and persuade the
low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree to pay up out of
ignorance and fear. Ignore them.
Eventually, you will receive a Letter of Claim (LoC), most
likely from DCB Legal (not DCBL). When you get the LoC, come
back and we will advise on how to respond. After that, you will
receive an actual N1SDT Claim Form from the CNBC. Again, we will
provide a suitable defence. After many months (could be up to a
year or even more), the claim will be either struck out or
discontinued and that will be the end of the matter. There is
less than 1% chance that this will ever go as far as a hearing.
Just ignore everything now except either an loC or the claim. We
do not need to know about the useless and powerless DRAs.
#Post#: 60886--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PARKING CHARGE - BURNLEY BIRTH CENTRE BURNLEY HOSPITAL
DIR By: nothavingthis
Date: March 6, 2025, 5:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi,
Nope, did not receive any evidence pack at all.
Ok, thanks for the information you provided on the usual process
of things going forward.
I have thought about just paying the £60 or whatever amount it
is to finish the matter? I have a lot of stuff going on at the
moment and to be honest could do without the stress. One part of
me wants to take it to the next steps and see how its pans out.
There was also no response from the hospital the letter we sent
them, they stopped replying to my emails.
Thank you.
--- Quote from: b789 link ---
>
> Never mind. Their decision is not binding on you and has no
bearing on anything going forwards. Do not pay anything.
>
> Did you not receive a copy of the operators evidence pack at
some stage after you submitted the POPLA appeal? If so, why did
you bot show us? Did you respond to the operators evidence pack?
>
> This POPLA assessor has a bit of a reputation for being
ignorant in most matters of contract law and I have already
drafted a few formal complaints about his flawed decision making
and obvious lack of sufficient contract law knowledge.
>
> This is what is going to happen next... you will receive a
bunch of useless Debt Recovery Agent (DRA) letters which you can
safely ignore. They are powerless except to try and persuade the
low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree to pay up out of
ignorance and fear. Ignore them.
>
> Eventually, you will receive a Letter of Claim (LoC), most
likely from DCB Legal (not DCBL). When you get the LoC, come
back and we will advise on how to respond. After that, you will
receive an actual N1SDT Claim Form from the CNBC. Again, we will
provide a suitable defence. After many months (could be up to a
year or even more), the claim will be either struck out or
discontinued and that will be the end of the matter. There is
less than 1% chance that this will ever go as far as a hearing.
>
> Just ignore everything now except either an loC or the claim.
We do not need to know about the useless and powerless DRAs.
>
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 60889--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PARKING CHARGE - BURNLEY BIRTH CENTRE BURNLEY HOSPITAL
DIR By: nothavingthis
Date: March 6, 2025, 5:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi agian,
I forgot to mention, after POPLA made their decision, UKPC
emailed me a letter as below:
Dear Mr xxxxxxxxx,
We are writing in relation to the above parking charge, which
you chose to appeal with the independent adjudicator POPLA.
Having considered the evidence provided by you and UK Parking
Control, we can confirm that POPLA have declined your appeal,
ruling in favour of UKPC.
As such, payment of £65.00 is now due and should be paid to UK
Parking Control Ltd within 28 days of the date of this letter.
Payment instructions may be found overleaf.
If you choose to do nothing the matter will be passed to our
debt recovery agent, at which point you will be liable to pay an
additional charge of £70, in accordance with the terms and
conditions of parking.
Further charges will also be claimed if court action is taken
against you. Any unpaid court judgement may adversely affect
your credit rating.
Yours sincerely,
Appeals Department
UK Parking Control Limited
--- Quote from: b789 link ---
>
> Never mind. Their decision is not binding on you and has no
bearing on anything going forwards. Do not pay anything.
>
> Did you not receive a copy of the operators evidence pack at
some stage after you submitted the POPLA appeal? If so, why did
you bot show us? Did you respond to the operators evidence pack?
>
> This POPLA assessor has a bit of a reputation for being
ignorant in most matters of contract law and I have already
drafted a few formal complaints about his flawed decision making
and obvious lack of sufficient contract law knowledge.
>
> This is what is going to happen next... you will receive a
bunch of useless Debt Recovery Agent (DRA) letters which you can
safely ignore. They are powerless except to try and persuade the
low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree to pay up out of
ignorance and fear. Ignore them.
>
> Eventually, you will receive a Letter of Claim (LoC), most
likely from DCB Legal (not DCBL). When you get the LoC, come
back and we will advise on how to respond. After that, you will
receive an actual N1SDT Claim Form from the CNBC. Again, we will
provide a suitable defence. After many months (could be up to a
year or even more), the claim will be either struck out or
discontinued and that will be the end of the matter. There is
less than 1% chance that this will ever go as far as a hearing.
>
> Just ignore everything now except either an loC or the claim.
We do not need to know about the useless and powerless DRAs.
>
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 61034--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PARKING CHARGE - BURNLEY BIRTH CENTRE BURNLEY HOSPITAL
DIR By: b789
Date: March 6, 2025, 5:16 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Of course they will be demanding payment. It does not mean that
you owe them the money.
Our advice is to not pay it and ignore all the debt recovery
letters that are going to follow. The debt collectors are
powerless except to scare the low-hanging fruit on the gullible
tree to pay up out of ignorance and fear.
Once they realise that you are not low-hanging fruit they will
then issue a Letter of Claim (LoC) and then an N1SDT Claim Form.
We would provide a suitable defence and eventually they will
discontinue.
However, you sound as though you are going to capitulate and
become a part of the problem rather than part of the solution.
This is exactly what these predatory companies want... lambs to
the slaughter.
You either fight this all the way to a win or you waste your
money.
#Post#: 62778--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PARKING CHARGE - BURNLEY BIRTH CENTRE BURNLEY HOSPITAL
DIR By: nothavingthis
Date: March 16, 2025, 3:18 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi,
At the debt recovery letter stage and onwards, will they be
sending bailiffs?
Thanks
--- Quote from: b789 link ---
>
> Of course they will be demanding payment. It does not mean
that you owe them the money.
>
> Our advice is to not pay it and ignore all the debt recovery
letters that are going to follow. The debt collectors are
powerless except to scare the low-hanging fruit on the gullible
tree to pay up out of ignorance and fear.
>
> Once they realise that you are not low-hanging fruit they will
then issue a Letter of Claim (LoC) and then an N1SDT Claim Form.
We would provide a suitable defence and eventually they will
discontinue.
>
> However, you sound as though you are going to capitulate and
become a part of the problem rather than part of the solution.
This is exactly what these predatory companies want... lambs to
the slaughter.
>
> You either fight this all the way to a win or you waste your
money.
>
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 62781--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PARKING CHARGE - BURNLEY BIRTH CENTRE BURNLEY HOSPITAL
DIR By: b789
Date: March 16, 2025, 3:32 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Sigh... it never ceases to amaze ma how many people have
absolutely no idea of the processes behind all this and
irrational fears that bailiffs can just come knocking at your
door. Read on:
--- Quote ---
> Why no bailiff can knock on your door
>
> 1. County Court Judgment (CCJ):
>
> [indent]• A bailiff (enforcement agent) can only get involved
after a creditor has obtained a CCJ against you in a county
court.
> • If the CCJ is under £600, the creditor cannot transfer it to
the High Court for enforcement by a High Court Enforcement
Officer (HCEO). Instead, enforcement would remain under the
county court's jurisdiction.[/indent]
>
> 2. Threshold for High Court Enforcement:
>
> [indent]• If a CCJ is over £600 (including fees and interest),
the creditor can transfer it to the High Court for enforcement
by an HCEO. This is a common method because HCEOs tend to be
more effective at recovering money.[/indent]
>
> 3. Cost-Benefit Analysis for Creditors:
>
> [indent]• For CCJs under £600, creditors may find it
uneconomical to pursue enforcement through county court
bailiffs, as they are generally slower and less effective than
HCEOs.
> • As a result, creditors may opt not to escalate enforcement
for small amounts.[/indent]
>
> 4. Private Parking Charges and Bailiffs:
>
> [indent]• In the context of private parking charges, no
bailiff action can occur unless the parking operator has gone to
court, won a case, obtained a CCJ, and you fail to pay the
judgment within the stipulated time (usually 30 days).[/indent]
>
> So, no bailiff will come to your door for a debt under £600
unless the creditor deems it worth pursuing through county court
enforcement. However, even if the debt is over £600, bailiff
involvement only happens after a CCJ is issued, and enforcement
is transferred to the High Court.
--- End Quote ---
Nothing we advise on here will make anyone get a CCJ.
--- Quote ---
> A County Court Judgment (CCJ) does not just happen—it follows
a clear legal process. If someone gets a Parking Charge Notice
(PCN) from a private parking company, here's what happens step
by step:
>
> [indent]1. Parking Charge Notice (PCN) Issued
>
> [indent]• The parking company sends a letter (Notice to
Keeper) demanding money.
>
> • This is not a fine—it’s an invoice for an alleged breach of
contract.[/indent]
>
> 2. Opportunity to Appeal
>
> [indent]• The recipient can appeal to the parking company.
>
> •If rejected, they may be able to appeal to POPLA (if BPA
member) or IAS (if IPC member).
>
> • If an appeal is lost or ignored, the parking company demands
payment.[/indent]
>
> 3. Debt Collection Letters
>
> [indent]• The parking company might send scary letters or pass
the case to a debt collector.
>
> • Debt collectors have no power—they just send letters and can
be ignored.
>
> • No CCJ happens at this stage.[/indent]
>
> 4. Letter Before Claim (LBC)
>
> [indent]• If ignored for long enough, the parking company (or
their solicitor) sends a Letter Before Claim (LBC).
>
> • This is a warning that they may start a court case.
>
> • The recipient has 30 days to reply before a claim is filed.
>
> • No CCJ happens at this stage.[/indent]
>
> 5. County Court Claim Issued
>
> [indent]• If ignored or unpaid, the parking company may file a
claim with the County Court.
>
> • The court sends a Claim Form with details of the claim and
how to respond.
>
> • The recipient has 14 days to respond (or 28 days if they
acknowledge it).
>
> • No CCJ happens at this stage.[/indent]
>
> 6. Court Process
>
> [indent]• If the recipient defends the claim, a judge decides
if they owe money.
>
> • If the recipient ignores the claim, the parking company wins
by default.
>
> • No CCJ happens yet unless the recipient loses and ignores
the court.[/indent]
>
> 7. Judgment & Payment
>
> [indent]• If the court rules that money is owed, the recipient
has 30 days to pay in full.
>
> • If they pay within 30 days, no CCJ goes on their credit
file.
>
> • If they don’t pay within 30 days, the CCJ stays on their
credit file for 6 years.[/indent][/indent]
>
> Conclusion
>
> CCJs do not appear out of thin air. They only happen if:
>
> [indent]• A parking company takes the case to court.
>
> • The person loses or ignores the case.
>
> • The person fails to pay within 30 days.[/indent]
>
> If you engage with the process (appeal, defend, or pay on
time), no CCJ happens.
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 62782--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PARKING CHARGE - BURNLEY BIRTH CENTRE BURNLEY HOSPITAL
DIR By: jfollows
Date: March 16, 2025, 3:34 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
No.
Think it through.
If they take you to court, and if you lose, the court will
impose a fine on you, which - if you don’t pay - may ultimately
result in action against you to recover the fine.
Until then, nothing.
Companies can’t “send bailiffs” because they think you owe them
money.
b789 has spelled it out in detail above. I agree with the
sentiments - stop scaring yourself for no reason.
#Post#: 62784--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PARKING CHARGE - BURNLEY BIRTH CENTRE BURNLEY HOSPITAL
DIR By: b789
Date: March 16, 2025, 3:41 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=636]jfollows[/member], there are no "fines" involved in
civil litigation. The county court cannot and will not impose
any "fine" as this has nothing to do with statutory law and
penalties.
If this ever gets to court and all the way to a hearing
(unlikely), the county court is simply the ultimate dispute
resolution service. The operator (the claimant) says you owe
them a debt. You say you don't. A judge will hear the arguments
of both sides and based on the facts, will decide whether you
owe the debt or not. It is as simple as that. Even if you were
to be unsuccessful, it is highly likely that you would pay less
than the amount claimed, because extra costs and damages are not
allowed in the small claims track of the county court. That is
why it is known as the "small claims" court.
So, court in this sense is nothing to do with criminal law. That
is for higher courts such as the magistrates court, high court
and above. This is simply a way to settle claims over an
alleged debt and you don't have a debt until a judge says you
do.
For anyone with an overactive imagination and thoughts about the
Old Bailey, wigs and gowns, here is a short video to explain how
a small-claims hearing is conducted in the county court:
HTML https://youtu.be/n93eoaxhzpU?feature=shared
#Post#: 62786--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC PARKING CHARGE - BURNLEY BIRTH CENTRE BURNLEY HOSPITAL
DIR By: jfollows
Date: March 16, 2025, 3:46 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
OK, noted, thanks.
*****************************************************
Page 4 of 5
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page