Yes it looks like that, gives them a chance of getting a commission I suspect if they get something. Let's see what happens

Haven't checked with council about planning, will look into that. Interestingly they have received another letter from DR+ offering a reduced payment, is this a last chance attempt to get at least something from them?[ATTACH=CONFIG]60053[/ATTACH]

Cheers

What a dunce, should have thought about reference numbers! When you say unapproved does that mean no one will see them now? Thanks for your advice, I was toying with writing and giving the 30 minutes free, therefore no loss argument but as they have got to the last letter maybe no point?

[ATTACH=CONFIG]60033[/ATTACH]Hi All, I have uploaded a PDF of the original PCN and following letters. Her friend has received the same although they eacj have different times on their PCN's even though they were there at the same time and parked next to each other. I will have to go back and take pictures of the signs, they are about and it says that if parking for 30 mins free you should print out a ticket. Thanks.

Hi All, long time since I have been on here, I see that advice may have changed from ignore PCN's. My daughter and her friend parked at the lcoal Sainsburys that allows 30 minutes free parking. What they didn't realise was that you still had to print a ticket to put in the windscreen showing £0 paid and a 30 minutes time. They both got PCN's, both tickets show the time which was under the 30 minutes, the PCN for failing to display a ticket. I advised them to ignore the letters, they have now received one of the 'pretend' Bailiff letters and the friend is afraid of getting CCJ's etc, I have advised that won't happen unless you go to court and then fail to pay. Do you think it is worth writing to the Parking Company saying that they were within the free 30 minutes so no loss has been incurred? I believe they both received a NTO and neither have kept a receipt from the shopping they did. Thanks all.

Thanks all, I'll write to them and see where it goes.

Not sure if I'm posting in the right place, but here goes. My Mother in Law has been in a residential care home for 13 years since having a stroke. She sold her house to pay the fees. Every year the fee has gone by a hundred pounds a month. They inform us by letter and we amend the standing order. 3 years ago we moved house. We never received any further requests for increases in payments. My wife visits her mum every week and has had many dealings with the staff and management at the home, especially with regard to her care due to her immobility and use of hoists etc. She had informed them of our new address and phone number. Earlier this year we received a call from the finance department to say that they were owed over £4000, the reason being that they had been sending the increase letters to our old address! They didn't think to contact the home for our new contact details for over two years! The home has since asked us to move Mum in law to a nursing home because they can't cope with hoisting arrangements. They now want the remaining £2500 grand or so payment. The question is, if they failed to tell us of the increase in payments, do we still have to pay? It was their incompetence that they didn't inform us, why wait 2 years to chase up the home for a contact address. Thanks for any advice in advance.

Not a fine ok, still a charge that they want money for

Hi All We have previously ignored these tickets but appears a new law has come in without my knowledge! One of our pool vehicles got a ticket from Parking Eye. A notice to owner was received and duly ignored. We had a reminder, ignored. Now a new letter stating that under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act the charge can be recovered form the keeper. Not seen much on here about it. Have they finally won and the keeper has to pay the fine? Had a quick read of it, looks like they can. Any advice please? Cheers

Hi All One of our chaps has been hit with a PCN, we do a lot of work in London involving surveys around the area and have difficulty parking and as such have had several PCNs. We have fought some, this one I think is bang to rights, but to be fair to the chap would ask for feedback. He parked in a shared parking spot, which was residents only from 10-11, he was caught at 10.30. PCN enclosed, anything wrong with it? He says his car is grey not silver, looks silver to me though. There was not the chance to buy a ticket, I presume it was free if you parked outside of the hours stated. PCN Barnet.pdf

Took it to the adjudicator and the appeal was upheld. 'The Council decided not to contest the appeal and as such the adjudicator has directed that the appeal is allowed without consideration of any evidence or the merits of the case'. A clear case of the council hoping that you will get fed up / scared and pay up even though they have lost before on this issue, and if you stand your ground for something that is so obviously wrong you can win. Thanks for the advice everyone.

Yes thats right, the Charge Cert was received but not the NTO. We rung asking about it, they said it had been sent, so we sent a letter asking for another NTO, it is the response to that letter that we recieved last.

They haven't sent a form, just a letter to say it will be registered as a debt, will something be sent then to reply to?

We waited for the NTO which didn't turn up, they sent a letter saying that they would be registering at the the county court. We rang and wrote again saying that an NTO hadn't been received can you send another one. They have have now written again saying that as represenations weren't made in the stated period of time, it is too late to pay the reduced amount, make formal reps or pass on liability. If the full sum isn't made in 21 days the amount will be registered as a debt at the county court, a warrant of execution may be issued to the bailiff to recover payment. They say on registration of the debt you can make a witness statement under 4 grounds (one is didn't receive the NTO). They say they cannot enter into any further correspondence regarding the matter. What should we do from here. The young lady is looking to get a mortgage soon and so doesn't want to impact that with a debt registered against her.

Hello All We have received the second refusal to cancel the ticket from Reading. This one states that all the signs meet and conform to the standards etc. We will take it furtther throught he adjudicator, any advice re what they have said in thier letter with regard to signage? Cheers Reading pcn Reply 2.pdf

Mightymouse_69 - I agree with you, but the young lady was in a rush (no excuse I know) and failed to see what happened. I'm sure there are plenty of others who have done the same, simple but costly mistake, who hasn't been there...

Enclosed repsonse from Council reading reply.pdf

Fair point about the reg being on the ticket, but all the times on each match, ie the credit card reciept to the display ticket and the PCN issue between the times paid for. The CEO noted there was a ticket in the window but not the right way up and so couldn't be validated.

Enclosed initial letter, their response and PCN Cheers COL Response.pdf COL PCN.pdf PCN Letter 18.03.pdf

I have a copy of the letter we sent, the reply basically said you were parked in a residents parking bay and you will have to pay the fine, if you want to contest wait for the NTO. I'll get my colleague to bring the Reading letter in tomorrow. Cheers Reading PCN Appeal.pdf

Thanks, we will wait for the NTO and take it from there

Sorry, upside down, as the back of the ticket was on display

Hi A colleague parked in a bay in the City of London and paid £11 for a ticket by credit card. She got a ticket for failing to display. The ticket had turned upside down when the door was closed. We wrote sending the ticket and credit card receipt. They have replied saying that the CEO noted that there was a ticket in the window but the validity could not be verified and so a ticket was issued. They still want payment. If we appeal again they won't allow the reduced payment. Does anyone think that going further may be worth it. It is a bit annoying since she paid a large amount for parking anyway, it's not as if she tried to get away with it, but still failure to display. Cheers

Reading rejected the first letter, now awaiting the NTO to take it further.