Parking Eye

[bluebottle]

Re: Parking Eye

Hi

After a bit of advice from the forum I sent off my email to CSB Group, the owner of Thurmaston Shopping Centre - and I got a reply from their Director, Group Solicitor:

"Thank you for your email.

The terms of the contract upon which parking at Thurmaston Shopping Centre is permitted are displayed on signs at the entrance to the car park and throughout. These include reference to a penalty charge amount in the event 4 hours free parking is exceeded.

Both CSB and Civil Enforcement Limited are well aware of the legal position concerning their relationship and use of the car park. If you wish to dispute the charge it is a matter for you, but please note that any correspondence should be directed to Civil Enforcement Limited.

Kind regards

J J Murphy

Director
Group Solicitor

Charles Street Buildings Group"

Mr Murphy is probably a commercial lawyer who is not familiar with the legal intricacies of PoFA and other legislation that makes PPCs' fatuous charges unenforceable. I would never be surprised to see a landowner hauled in front of a judge pleading, "But my commercial lawyer told me it was lawful," only to be told by a judge, "No excuse. Get proper advice."

[CleverClogs]

Re: Parking Eye

Mr Murphy is probably a descendant of the founders of that business - link

IFYPFY.

[Puff67]

Re: Parking Eye

Sorry to say I cannot fathom out how to post a scan of TOG from Debt Recovery Plus Ltd - silver surfer with little knowledge of such things! But I'm not afraid. In my youth I took someone to small claims court - they came with laywer whom had the temerity to say I should have done the same - in small claims! - no - SM is/was there for the masses and in any case I could not afford one. Sadly I lost out on that - but hey made my point and actually cost me very little - no "rewards" from judge for their witness attendance etc - and other party had to pay for lawyer!

[busytrev]

Re: Parking Eye

Am I right in saying that any PCN is not worth the paper it is written on and should we all just tell them to **** right off :bedjump:

[bluebottle]

Re: Parking Eye

Am I right in saying that any PCN is not worth the paper it is written on and should we all just tell them to **** right off :bedjump:

If the PCN is issued by a local authority, don't for goodness sake tell them to move off in short, sharp, jerky movements. Those PCNs are issued under statutory authority and are legally-enforceable. With PPCs, unpaid Pay & Display charges are enforceable under Contract Law, but only to the extent of the P & D charge itself and reasonable collection costs, usually, £5-£10. If they use a DCA to collect by default, then it can be argued they have not mitigated their losses, but compounded them. The law is quite clear in that you can only be put back in the position you were in before an alleged loss occurred. You cannot be better-off, financially, which is called betterment. The only exception to this rule is in the case of certain criminal offences where it is the cost of either repairing or replacing something that has been lost or damaged through criminal behaviour. There is a raft of legislation that makes the fatuous claims made by PPCs as regards their penalty charges unenforceable. Putting it simply, if they and the landowner have lost nothing, they are entitled to nothing. A private individual or body corporate cannot impose any form of penalty upon an individual. Only Parliament can do that through the legislative process.

[busytrev]

Re: Parking Eye

I received this letter from Debt Recovery Plus today:

Dear Mr ******

Thank you for your telephone call on 11/04/13, whereas during this call you refused to pay the reduced offer of £15 to close the above parking charge.

I recommend that you obtain professional legal advice regarding this matter.

I feel obligated to inform you that, under the Pre-Action Conduct of the Civil Procedural Rules, court action must only be vield as a last resort. I are attempting to abide by this direction by trying to settle the matter amicably without court involvement.

I understand that being issued with a parking charge is an inconvenience. However, unless further evidence is provided our decision on this matter is final and the charge will stand. Furthermore, while any further correspondence contesting the decision will be noted and filed, I cannot assure you of a response unless fresh evidence is provided that would have a bearing on the decision.

Without settlement the account will be considered for legal action and this may further incur costs.

Furthermore, should this matter proceed to court a CCJ may be granted in our favour and this may draw a negative effect on your credit rating.

I will place the account of £160.00 on hold for 14 days to allow time for payment to be made.

However, if no payment is received within this period, the matter will be passed on to our legal team for their consideration.

Please find enclosed a copy of the photographic evidence and a copy of the signage from the Silverlink retail park where your vehicle was photographed in breach of the terms and conditions of parking at this site.

Yours Sincerely
Jess Clark
Collections Manager.

That is their letter exactly as it is written. Misspelt words and poor grammar. Should I bother replying or just ignore them?

[CleverClogs]

Re: Parking Eye

A preliminary, partial draft...

Dear Jess Clark,

Thank you for your latest letter, in which you reversed your company's previous decision that the parking "penalty" was inappropriate given that the driver of the vehicle has disabilities and has a "Blue Badge" issued by ============= Council.

You will doubtless recall that the "reduced offer" of a demand for £15 was stated to defray the cost of obtaining the data of the registered keeper of the vehicle from the DVLA. That letter, along with evidence of the actual charge made by the DVLA, would be presented in evidence if this matter were ever to proceed to court.

As I am not a lawyer, I cannot be completely certain what term my lawyer would use, but I seem to recall something about "unjust enrichment". Doubtless your legal team will be able to advise you what term one might use to describe such an apparent inflation of purported costs.

I enclose a copy of the web page describing parking at the Silverlink Retail Park. As this would also be submitted in evidence, I would be most grateful if you could indicate where there is any mention of parking charges.

[busytrev]

Re: Parking Eye

Thanks for the advice CC. I have drafted this letter with your advice included would you mind proof reading it prior to me sending it.
Thanks again....

Dear Jess Clark,

Thank you for your latest letter, in which you reversed your company’s previous decision that the parking “penalty” was inappropriate given that the passenger in the vehicle at the time has severe disabilities and has a “blue badge” issued by North Tyneside Council.
You will doubtless recall that the "reduced offer" of a demand for £15 was stated to defray the cost of obtaining the data of the registered keeper of the vehicle from the DVLA . That letter, along with evidence of the actual charge made by the DVLA, would be presented in evidence if this matter were ever to proceed to court.
As I am not a lawyer, I cannot be completely certain what term my lawyer would use, but I seem to recall something about “unjust enrichment”. Doubtless your legal team will be able to advise you what term one might use to describe such an apparent inflation of purported costs.
I did not refuse to pay the £15 reduced offer for the above parking charge I simply asked your colleague for clarification as to what the £15 was for to which she stated “to cover DVLA costs”. Now can you confirm how much it costs your company to obtain driver/owner details from the DVLA? As I understand it the cost to you is £2.50 for each request. Secondly I furnished you with my details the day after the ticket was issued so why would you have any need to contact the DVLA?
I then asked your colleague for the terms of the contract that I entered upon when I visited the car park which she refused to provide. So I assume that I have breached this civil contract. If this is the case then can you explain to me how the land owner has suffered any financial loss due to my actions and what the losses are?
If you and the landowner have lost nothing, then you are entitled to nothing. A private individual or body corporate cannot impose any form of penalty upon an individual. Only Parliament can do that through the legislative process.
Furthermore while any further correspondence contesting MY decision will be noted and filed. I cannot assure YOU of a response unless you furnish me with the requested information.
I enclose a copy of the web page describing parking at the Silverlink Retail Park. As this would also be submitted in evidence, I would be most grateful if you could indicate where there is any mention of parking charges.

Yours Sincerely.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Parking Eye

Wait for other comments.

[Crepello]

Re: Parking Eye

I have been following this thread as a non member but I have eventually managed to create an account here.I would appreciate any advice on a parking charge notice that I received for parking in a disabled bay. The ticket was issued for not displaying a disabled badge although the person I was with is genuinely disabled and is wheelchair bound and we were waiting for the disabled permit to be issued which we now have. I appealed the original ticket and was given 35 days to provide proof of the disabled permit.Unfortunately it took longer than 35 days for the council to issue our disabled badge.I have since received 2 letters from Debt Recovery Plus Ltd saying that if I don't pay them £160 then they will obtain a ccj against me. I contacted them and provided copies of the disabled permit they then reviewed the decision and said that if I pay £15 then the matter will be resolved. I know £15 is nothing and won't bankrupt me but out of principal I am reluctant to give them any money they stated that the £15 is to cover dvla costs etc even though I provided them with my details so they would have had no need to contact the dvla. Should I pay the money and have they got any powers to enforce the payment.

"they will obtain a ccj against me"; you mean "they MAY obtain a ccj against me". In all probability they will not.

[bluebottle]

Re: Parking Eye

Thanks for the advice CC. I have drafted this letter with your advice included would you mind proof reading it prior to me sending it.
Thanks again....

Dear Jess Clark,

Thank you for your latest letter, in which you reversed your company’s previous decision that the parking “penalty” was inappropriate given that the passenger in the vehicle at the time has severe disabilities and has a “blue badge” issued by North Tyneside Council.

You will doubtless recall that the "reduced offer" of a demand for £15 was stated to defray the cost of obtaining the data of the registered keeper of the vehicle from the DVLA . That letter, along with evidence of the actual charge made by the DVLA, would be presented in evidence if this matter were ever to proceed to court.

As I am not a lawyer, I cannot be completely certain what term my lawyer would use, but I seem to recall something about “Unjustifiable Enrichment”. Doubtless your legal team will be able to advise you what term one might use to describe such an apparent inflation of purported cost. The attention of yourself, Debt Recovery Plus and your client is drawn to the ruling in the case of Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd -v- New Street Garage & Motor CO. Ltd [1915] which makes it clear a claimant in a civil claim can only claim for actual and quantifiable loss suffered. A claimant must not be financially better-off as a result. Also, you are reminded that it is the duty of a claimant to mitigate their losses as much as possible. It would appear that Debt Recovery Plus has not complied with this duty.

I did not refuse to pay the £15 reduced offer for the above parking charge. I simply asked your colleague for clarification as to what the £15 was for to which she stated “...to cover DVLA costs”. Would you please confirm, in writing, how much it costs your company to obtain driver/owner details from DVLA? It is my understanding that the actual cost to you is £2.50 for each request. Furthermore, I furnished you with my details the day after the ticket was issued so why would you have any need to contact the DVLA? In compliance with claimant obligations under Civil Procedures Rules, I now put Debt Recovery Plus on strict proof of charges imposed by DVLA and require that such proof is furnished within 14 days of your receipt of this letter. I then asked your colleague for the terms of the contract that I am alleged to have entered into when I visited the car park and which she not only refused to provide, but has, so far, failed to provide. How can you allege that I have breached some alleged contract when your company and, indeed, your client is failing and refusing to produce evidence of this contract? You are put on notice, as is your client, that you must produce to me a schedule of all actual and quantifiable losses your client is alleged to have suffered as a result of my alleged actions. Should this not be forthcoming, then it is apparent to myself, as it will be to a court, that your client has not, in fact, suffered any loss at all and that the alleged 'parking charge' is, in fact, an unenforceable penalty. As you, Debt Recovery Plus and your client will know or ought to know, a private individual or a body corporate cannot impose any form of penalty. Only Parliament may impose penalties through the legislative process.

Whilst any further correspondence contesting MY decision will be noted and filed, I cannot assure YOU of a response unless you furnish me with the evidence I have requested.

I enclose a copy of the web page describing parking at the Silverlink Retail Park. As this will also be submitted in evidence, I would be most grateful if you could indicate where there is any mention of parking charges.

Yours Sincerely.

Amendments in red type. I would hold fire on throwing the Fraud Act 2006 at them. Only do that if they decide to behave like idiots and plough on regardless.

[busytrev]

Re: Parking Eye

Amendments in red type. I would hold fire on throwing the Fraud Act 2006 at them. Only do that if they decide to behave like idiots and plough on regardless.

Awesome!!! Thank you BB I can't wait to send the letter...Many Many thanks...:car:

[bluebottle]

Re: Parking Eye

You're welcome, Busytrev.

Debt Collection Plus and the landowner are sailing dangerously close to the wind, legally, IMHO. The Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co case has been a cornerstone of English Civil Litigation Law for the last 98 years and has not, as yet, been superseded by any other court ruling.

I would be very surprised if Debt Collection Plus ploughed on, regardless, after receiving a letter such as that above. My gut-feeling is that the landowner and Debt Collection Plus are going to be hard-pushed to explain their actions and failure to act, not only to yourself, but to a court, also, if it ever gets that far.

On the letter you are going to send, put the following cc list at the bottom -

cc. OFT Credit Fitness Team
*********** Trading Standards
Simon Tse, Chief Executive, Driver & Vehicle Licensing Agency

OFT Credit Fitness Team is the part of OFT that can revoke a debt collector's licence. As far as DVLA is concerned, it is my understanding that DVLA withdrew access to its databases to a number of PPCs when PoFA came into force. Do you catch my drift? I am attaching a document which guides you through the process of reporting a bailiff company to OFT Credit Fitness Team, but the process is the same for DCAs. All you need is Debt Collection Plus's OFT Licence Number and their company name, which should be on their letterheading to be added to the requisite email. Send a copy of all correspondence (scanned) with the email. Also, use the OFT664 to play "Spot the Breaches" and list ALL breaches of the Guidelines in your email. Copy the email to your local Trading Standards Department. Send hard copies to Simon Tse.

BB

[busytrev]

Re: Parking Eye

You're welcome, Busytrev.

Debt Collection Plus and the landowner are sailing dangerously close to the wind, legally, IMHO. The Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co case has been a cornerstone of English Civil Litigation Law for the last 98 years and has not, as yet, been superseded by any other court ruling.

I would be very surprised if Debt Collection Plus ploughed on, regardless, after receiving a letter such as that above. My gut-feeling is that the landowner and Debt Collection Plus are going to be hard-pushed to explain their actions and failure to act, not only to yourself, but to a court, also, if it ever gets that far.

On the letter you are going to send, put the following cc list at the bottom -

cc. OFT Credit Fitness Team
*********** Trading Standards
Simon Tse, Chief Executive, Driver & Vehicle Licensing Agency

OFT Credit Fitness Team is the part of OFT that can revoke a debt collector's licence. As far as DVLA is concerned, it is my understanding that DVLA withdrew access to its databases to a number of PPCs when PoFA came into force. Do you catch my drift? I am attaching a document which guides you through the process of reporting a bailiff company to OFT Credit Fitness Team, but the process is the same for DCAs. All you need is Debt Collection Plus's OFT Licence Number and their company name, which should be on their letterheading to be added to the requisite email. Send a copy of all correspondence (scanned) with the email. Also, use the OFT664 to play "Spot the Breaches" and list ALL breaches of the Guidelines in your email. Copy the email to your local Trading Standards Department. Send hard copies to Simon Tse.

BB

Thanks again BB I really appreciate the time you have taken to provide me with the advice and I'll cc the mentioned names at the end. Just a quick one on that point I note that you have used asterisks in front of Trading Standards do they have different departments and if so which one should I use?

[CleverClogs]

Re: Parking Eye

OFT Credit Fitness Team is the part of OFT that can revoke a debt collector's licence. As far as DVLA is concerned, it is my understanding that DVLA withdrew access to its databases to a number of PPCs when PoFA came into force.

It is my belief that they should not have granted access to parking parasites which do not seem to appear on the ICO Public Register. DRP does not appear under any of its trading names, nor does any of those names appear when one tries a postcode search.

Oh dear...

All you need is Debt Collection Plus's OFT Licence Number and their company name, which should be on their letterheading to be added to the requisite email.

They are more helpful than that, as those data appear on their web site (link)

Debt Recovery Plus Limited. Registered in England and Wales. Registered office: 78 York Street, London, W1H 1DP. Company Registration No. 6774150. VAT Registration No. 977956045. Consumer Credit License No. 624357

I have attached a copy of their Licence, along with the ICO Register entries for the radio cabs firm next door to their place in Ashton, and the two businesses in Globe Square, Dukinfield.