Me V UKCPS Ltd

[Spunkymonkey]

Hands up those who think that any post from someone who

 

1) received lots of good advice and support, over 18 months

2) reached an "amicable agreement" dealt with the "fair, responsible and professional people" to discourage others from doing the same

 

doesn't really have any credibility?

 

 

*** waves both hands in air while typing with his nose ***

[SURFBOY]

It sounds to me like the " Ignoring all letters" approach is working then.

Reading between the lines it sounds like "Ignoring all letters " is hurting them!

What do you think?

[pt2537]

It has been well documented that I have been going through County Court Proceedings, brought by UKCPS. It is fair to say that throughout the process UKCPS have acted fairly, responsible and professional at all times.

 

It is also fair for me to acknowledge at this time, having reached an amicable settlement with UKCPS that Car Park Charging Companies such as UKCPS, have a right to charge a fee for parking on private land, when authorised to do by the land owner.

 

Having gone through the process of mediation as a result of the proceedings brought against me, I would also advise other people in a similar position to avoid ignoring letters received from UKCPS as it is highly likely that court action will be the result of doing so.

 

 

Hmmmm, and im sure Chemical Ali acted fairly , responsibly and Professionally when he order the gassing of the Iraqi Kurds at Halabja:rolleyes: Give me a break

 

This is utter nonsense, clearly scripted and no way the sort of type that would be expected,

 

working for a law firm who take on this type of work, i can say that we do not back down nor have we lost a litigation yet

[crem]

It is also fair for me to acknowledge at this time, having reached an amicable settlement with UKCPS that Car Park Charging Companies such as UKCPS, have a right to charge a fee for parking on private land, when authorised to do by the land owner.

 

A fee, Yes. £1.00 per hour or something similar to local council car parks in the area, paid for as a P&D fee, refunded by stores perhaps.

 

A fine, No! 2 hours free then £75.00 for the next 5 minutes or above. £75.00 for parking in a mother & child bay with no child seat showing in the car, when such bays have no legal status and are merely a request for courtesy from fellow drivers really. etc etc

[pt2537]

 

It is also fair for me to acknowledge at this time, having reached an amicable settlement with UKCPS that Car Park Charging Companies such as UKCPS, have a right to charge a fee for parking on private land, when authorised to do by the land owner.

 

ONLY as long as the terms of the contract are visible at the point of entry, there is a fabulous judgment from the great Lord Denning on contracts in car parks and trust me , if the terms arent fully clear on entry then, ut oh mr parkling company could be in trouble

[peternet]

The facts are simple - UKCPS do take County Court Action with success and will continue to do so if necessary. As far as I am aware Simon did not contact us until court papers were issued. So the ignore tactic seems to fail. Not much more to say really - let people work this out for themselves.

[DistressedCafeRaffler]

As someone in the know about this case I can confirm that Simon has been very definitely nobbled. But so has UKCPS. They have agreed to drop the case if he makes a statement supportive of them which they have scripted. He has agreed, to avoid the hassle and not because of any case that UKCPS might have. Of course the wording of the statement was clearly drafted by a PPC but that is what happened in case there is any doubt. We can all say that we would have done differently - and many including me would - but there it is. Rather than demonstrate strength this forced statement reveals a pathetic weakness at the heart of UKCPS, which is also shown by other PPCs. They are so worried of losing the PR argument that they are willing to waive all charges as long as the publicity is not negative. In doing so they make themselves more ridiculous - the charge is enforcable but if you put out a nice touchy feely statement about us we will waive it just for you. Where are your principles UKCPS? Why don't you stand up and be counted, rather than doing backstreet deals? Let's hear from you peternet, you were mouthy enough in the past.

[lamma]

DistressedCafeRaffler :) :) - a touch of genius in user name selection.

[kiptower]

Raffle Tickets ?? i take it they will be the "unenforceable type" just like their other tickets then :rolleyes:

[Spunkymonkey]

If that's the case, and the post was scripted by UKCPS, surely it should be removed by Admin?

 

Simon has done what they requested but a forum like this should not be available for propaganda by the very people it's there to stand up to!

[crem]

agreed

[the_freedom_trail]

I support this, Admin please remove it

 

TFT

[freakyleaky]

I don't see what good removing the statement would do. Anyone who reads it, together with all the comments from the CAG regulars, can see that this is beyond doubt scripted by UKCPS and shows exactly the lengths they have to go to in order to try and save some face.

 

This just strengthens the arguments against them as far as I can see.

[PPCsrYella]

UKCPS must take CAGgers for fools. Do they really believe that their ridiculous statement will entice even one more motorist to pay up? It will of course have the opposite effect - a company that has to go to these ludicruous lengths to avoid egg on face is not exactly to be feared. Can UKCPS not see this or are they missing something in the commonsense department? For that reason I would agree to leave the post by "Simon" in place - it will serve as a perpetual reminder of the desperation and powerlessness of PPCs like UKCPS.

[Al27]

Common tactic to get stooges to claim you should pay private parking companies.

 

Luckily they seem to be extraordinarily bad at it.

 

This new piece of propaganda plumbs new depths, but reaches new heights in the hilarity stakes.

[Spunkymonkey]

I don't see what good removing the statement would do. Anyone who reads it, together with all the comments from the CAG regulars, can see that this is beyond doubt scripted by UKCPS and shows exactly the lengths they have to go to in order to try and save some face.

 

This just strengthens the arguments against them as far as I can see.

 

Fair comment - as you say, it's been made pretty clear what the general opinion of it is

[HSBCrusher]

It is utter cack as far as I'm concerned..

[electron99]

I understand it is possible to retrieve deleted content or posts from the internet. Perhaps someone with better knowledge than I, can do this for Simon's deleted posts, and post them as a quote here so that we can read back on the history leading to this extraordinary fairy tale statement.

 

I suspect these posts were deleted at the request of the PPC, which leads me to suspect the content is something they don't want us to see.

[PPCsrYella]

Here's a good example of Simon's previous position:

 

The Consumer Forums - View Single Post - Me V UKCPS Ltd

 

"Absolute extortion" by UKCPS to "fair, responsible and professional people". Quite a change one must admit. I have to say I am curious as to the sudden change of heart.

[the_freedom_trail]

This should be a clear message to UKCPS that this cheap stunt has not worked - egg on your face lol

 

TFT

[lamma]

mediation will have been ordered by the court. with a good defense filed CPS will have been very keen to stick to the mediation path as it prevented a high profile loss in court (despite their wonderous 'legal advice' page) and let them come out with the kind of clearly planted statement that we have now seen.

 

Will CPS take up the pepipoo challenge ? No they won't. And unless they do (and win it !) then there is the clearest (and obvious inference) that has to be made.

[peternet]

Once again Lamma it must be pointed out that UKCPS and CPS are two totally different, unaffiliated in any way, companies. Site mods please confirm this to be the case then perhaps site users can understand that not much of the info from frequent site contributors is based on fact or detailed knowledge of what in fact is going on.

[Al27]

Sounds like they've been stuffed then.

 

Well done Simon - you've won an out of court settlement in effect.

[DDWales]

Sounds like they've been stuffed then.

 

Well done Simon - you've won an out of court settlement in effect.

 

Indeed

[PPCsrYella]

Do you think UKCPS actually paid Simon something to issue his "declaration of undying love"? I would not be surprised. This has to be one of the most hamfisted own goals I've seen in a while. Did UKCPS really expect to be met with anything except hooting derision? What are these guys on? Not quite in the hilarious league of Perky pretending to be the defendant in the Oldham case he claims he won but very close.