Clamped by Park Direct Ltd

[crem]

If you intend to take Park Direct to court, make sure you include the landowner in the claim as a joint defendant. If you win, it is unlikely that Park Direct would pay you anyway, but the landowner is much easier to enforce a judgement against.

[stuartw]

I was illegaly clamped by Park Direct in Oct 2010. They of course refused my appeal so I took action through the small claims court, Park Direct declined to defend or respond to the action and a county court judgement was issued which has to date, been ignored.

 

The registry trust lists 36 unsatisfied CCJs against this company totaling over £25,000 in money they have illegally taken off us, and that's just the figure for people who have bothered to take court action, the real figure must be several times this amount. There's little point going through the hassle of court action if they can just ignore it and get away with it, and sending in a bailiff is not going to work either. The law is useless in these circumstances, you have to take action against the company and can't take action against an individual. If you could send the CCJ to Abraham Saliba, Park Direct's owner, then I'm sure they might pay up, as it stands now they can ignore it all with impunity.

 

My next plan of action was to write to the British parking association to whom Park Direct were members, however the BPA logo has now been removed from Park Directs website, so I assume their membership has been cancelled. So I intend to write to all the other organisations and companies proudly displayd on PDs website (one generic letter with minor adjustments, should suffice) and I'm going to write to Ealing trading standards.

 

I would urge anyone ripped off by them to do the same because if WH Smith and Barclays receive enough letters questioning their credibility as a proffessional business for contracting the likes of PD then they may cancel their contracts.

 

A couple of months ago someone took down all the Park Direct Signs in the Private road where I was clamped and it took PD 3 or 4 days to realise. They then had to go round and replace them all but a week or so later they all got taken down again. Whilst I can't of course condone this type of action, it greatly amused me and is certainly one one way of fighting back.

 

Court Action is not really going to have any effect unless the law is changed, these companies are laughing in our faces as we fruitlessly waste our time and money going through the process so I suggest the time might be better spent writing to Trading Standards and PDs clients.

[crem]

Too late for you now, but it is always recommended on CAG that should you take court action against a PPC, you should always include the landowner as a co-defendant. In that way, when you win your case, both are legally liable and you can enforce against either. Clearly it will always be easier to enforce against the landowner as he has tangible assests that can be ceased/sold.

[stuartw]

I did include the land owners who responded by denying any responsibility for Park Directs Activities. I guess I could send bailiffs in to them, but it's Park Direct who need to pay up. I can't beleive they can just get away with this blatant contempt for the law.

[crem]

I did include the land owners who responded by denying any responsibility for Park Directs Activities. I guess I could send bailiffs in to them, but it's Park Direct who need to pay up. I can't beleive they can just get away with this blatant contempt for the law.

 

The landowner can deny responsibility all they like.... They hired the PPC so they are legally responsible for the PPCs' actions.

 

If the court found in your favour, then the award is against BOTH the joint defendants and you can enforce against either. Go after the landowner.

[stuartw]

Ok Thanks, I'll do that and let you know what happens..........

[Edward121]

I have recently been clamped by Park Direct after my car broke down. I stopped in a private car park with the hazard lights on. In my mind this was better than stopping in the middle of a road and becoming a serious hazard. After leaving the car to use a payphone to call my mechanic I was clamped. I am complaining the the basis that: There were mitigating circumstances which forced me to stop, my hazard lights were on, and also the fine is disproportionate to the penalty ( I was forced to pay £375 as 'the tow truck was on its way' and I called the office 6 minutes after the clamp was put on the car = £62.50 / minute).

 

Could anyone else advise on what basis their complaints have been made and whether they have had any success.

 

Thanks

[stuartw]

Good luck with appealing, but it's unlikely that Park Direct will refund you anything, no matter how valid your reasons, but make the appeal anyway. Double check the receipt they gave you to ensure all the details are correct, that you have the signature and badge number of the lowlifes who did the clamping. If you get nowhere with the appeal and can be bothered, take them to the small claims court (along with the land owners), it's a fairly easy process and your local county court will give you the neccessary info and forms. It costs about £40 but I claimed for this along with interest and for my time, adding about £150 to the amount I was claiming. Park Direct will of course ignore this and the ensuing county court judgement, but at least you have something registered should they eventually be made to pay up.

 

I've done all this and have also complained to the trading standards in Ealing (the Borough in which I was clamped) and in Hillingdon (The borough where Park Direct are based). I'm still awaiting a response from them but the more people who complain, the more likely it is that they will take action, so at the very least do this.

 

Good Luck

[crem]

Park Direct will of course ignore this and the ensuing county court judgement, but at least you have something registered should they eventually be made to pay up.

 

 

While it is true that the clamping company will most likely ignore the judgement, I'm not sure why you were unable to enforce against teh landowner who cannot so easily ignore a court?

[stuartw]

The landowner responded to court action and made a defence of denying any responsibility for Park Directs actions on their land, which is surely illegal? Surely you can't contract someone to operate on your land and on your behalf and then allow them to do what they like?

 

Park Direct ignored the court action and the CCJ was issued. The Land owners case is now stayed until November by which time they either pay up or apply to have the stay removed.

 

I'm not sure why Park Direct can ignore the CCJ but the landowners can't?

[crem]

The landowner responded to court action and made a defence of denying any responsibility for Park Directs actions on their land, which is surely illegal? Surely you can't contract someone to operate on your land and on your behalf and then allow them to do what they like?

Correct, the landowner contracted the PPC so is fully liable for their actions. The court should know this

 

Park Direct ignored the court action and the CCJ was issued. The Land owners case is now stayed until November by which time they either pay up or apply to have the stay removed.

 

 

I'm not sure why Park Direct can ignore the CCJ but the landowners can't?

because the landowner has clearly defined assets so you can send the bailiff in against them much easier than a PPC (who always claim they don't own any direct assets)

..

[DJXFM]

..

 

My car was unlawfully taken by a different PPC and a friend of mine who specialises in contract law gave me lots of information on how to get my money back, having done a lot of work on my part, but in the end it's a cat-and-mouse game where blame is passed around and the only result is that you spend more money trying to get the original sum back.

 

The landowner will defend their liability in any case involving the PPC by saying the expect the PPC to act lawfully during the course of their business so it's not their problem. If the judge agrees you COULD be liable for the landowner's costs in having to defend a case to which they have been deemed to have done no wrong.

 

So then it's down to the PPC. As we know, they'll simply ignore any CCJs and carry on as they did before. The owners of a PPC are not necessarily liable for the actions of their business so they are safe as well.

 

I was disappointed to learn all this but with starting a new job etc I don't have time to chase these idiots around ad infinitum. I'm content with knowing that I worked hard enough at school to not have to take to cowboy clamping to make a living.

 

The law allows us to not pay PPC tickets, but it also allows PPCs to clamp and tow with total impunity. I am looking forward to hearing what changes are afoot with the imminent ban on private clamping - something needs doing!

[jkdd77]

Exactly, which is why the only remedy at present for a unlawful clamping is to cut the clamp off on the basis that no viable alternative exists- since paying and suing is simply throwing good money after bad. If the vehicle is towed then the owner is completely out of options.

[tedd4]

DOES PARK DIRECT LTD OWE YOU MONEY?

Since the formation of Park Direct Ltd in 2004 which serves to ensure that private parking lots were used within the terms of the owners, the number of complaints against this company rose and rose can be measured by an internet search to see that within forums people were experiencing similar episodes of being held to ransom and sites such as this one were advising on what to do in attempting to redressing the injustice..

 

 

Failure to do so meant immobilising and probably towing your car away but they did so at extortionate rates and employed tactics that have since been brought to the courts and they have been charged accordingly.

 

 

Richmond Magistrates’ Court on May 22 2012 faced two counts of recklessly engaging in a commercial practice, accused of failing to display adequate warning signs and of charging both a clamping charge and a towing or cancellation fee, one count of engaging in a commercial practice which was aggressive and three counts of engaging in advertising which is misleading. A director of Park Direct Limited, was charged. He resigned and there is a new director in place.

 

However, inspection of their accounts and the Register of Judgments, Orders and Fines for England and Wales, date of search 23 January 2013, reveals that in the 9 years they have operated the number of court orders rose (59/69 judgement's made between 2010 - 2012).

A total of 69 unsatisfied judgments appear to remain unpaid.

 

 

Abbreviated accounts do not provide me with enough information to ascertain whether or not these were considered.

To date, Park Direct Ltd owes in excess of £27k to various parties including London Councils.

 

 

In relation to each accounting year there were adequate funds to pay the court orders.

At the end of 2012 Emma Powers put in a voluntary proposal to shut the company down.

Companies will do so in due course unless there are objections.

 

 

To date, there have been suspensions but these are lifted and the company will close in May 2013.

Its obvious why they have requested dissolution.

 

 

The Protection Of Freedom Bill passed as act in 2012 means they cannot operate like they used to.

With the lack of investigation by Companies House or the Insolvency department for not paying their judgements for irregular, illegal practices and misdemeanors for over 5 years and by effectively making it legally possible for them not to have to pay what the courts has ordered them to by allowing them to disolve the company is a disgrace and questions these agencies purpose.

 

It's easy to ignore the numerous summons as to do so costs nothing to them and they can pocket at least £27k which leaves the claimants as victims once again of this companies rogue operations that led to laws being passed in the first place. This time with the governements blessing.

 

If they owe you money, put in an objection to Companies House now before its too late and apply to the courts to get your money back before its too late.

Edited March 16, 2013 by citizenB
removed names

[themagician]

I thought that one you had a ccj against someone,once unpaid you can go to the sherrifs to collect the debt, the cost only being £80.which they add to the debt.

Edited March 20, 2013 by themagician
spelling

[lamma]

How could you enforce against a company that has no assets to seize ?

[Christopher Hughes]

TO COURT....

Hi all.

I've just decided to go the whole hog with Park Direct and have my day in court.

I got clamped 4 yrs ago by Park Direct Ltd and had a claim against them for overcharging upheld in court, but was unable to enforce it.

 

I had a parking fine from Park Direct UK Ltd recently and told them I'd pay theirs if they pay mine.

"Oh, we're a completely different company", but of course Abraham Saliba is still the owner/director.

 

So, by way of ammo to present to court to demonstrate what a slimeball Saliba is, I would be very grateful for your accounts of any dealings with Park Direct Ltd or Park Direct UK Ltd. If he has deliberately wound up a company with 27k of debts and court judgements when there were funds to cover them, then I am aiming to get him banned from being a director of any UK company.

 

He's making mugs of us all and a mockery of the law.

 

Please either post on here or send to me at christopher.hughes at …... Thanks

[ericsbrother]

You will have to prove that he has deliberately hidden assets from the creditors and that is difficult at the best of times. Better off reporting to regulatory authorities if you have anything as you stand to risk your own money for no gain.

Fight the new ticket by all means and if you get a court claim counterclaim for the costs previously awarded by saying that the director was misusing the assets of the previous co if you have any evidence of that.

[tedd4]

The Sherrif went to the operational office and didn’t find anything of value to take and the items that were there are regarded as essential objects for their operations and so couldn’t be taken.

 

A look at their Annual Return showed nonsense filing as their sums didn’t add up but an attempt to obtain and order for information wasn’t served because the company’s registered address had the Directors grandmother living there.

 

They also changed the director to one based in Scotland to make serving the notice more difficult.

 

Eventually, despite putting in objections to be struck off CH dissolved the company blatantly ignoring the facts about this company’s rogue behaviour, disregard for the law, 62 judgements against them that they didn’t honour.

 

In conclusion, the law isn’t on your side.

[renegadeimp]

Is there a reason you resurrected a dead 4 year old thread?

[tedd4]

The reason being is because the same people have come back without even as much as a disguise and continue to operate in a rogueish and bullish manner making money just within the law but illegitimate processes.

 

There are condemning reviews as recent as a month ago posted by Google, e.g.

 

‘This company is a fraud I am ready to take legal action against them because I parked for 2minutes to drop a customer off and they gave me a ticket

they preferred that I drop the customer on the main road.

 

I didn't even park my car lights where on I was just putting a route into my phone for my new disternation and they have fine me for that.

 

Fraud Fruad

 

people like this can not find a really job so they have to make other people life hell.

Go make proper money not seating a office stealing money of people you cheap skates.’

 

 

I have written to my M.P. about the circumstances particular to my case which is pertinent today as it was 4years ago.

The law has failed all the people who were owed money by this man and its failing more people now and will do on the future.

 

It’s not taking up too much of my time or any money but it’s unfinished business.

It’s criminal what they are doing and I wrote in the hope there maybe something you could have added to assist in bringing them to account or stopping their persistent abuse of the law for their own gains.

 

Apologies if I have wasted your time.

[dx100uk]

not wasting anyone's time.

 

though people on google need to learn you can park for a minimum no max without getting a ticket

even their operator guidelines [iAS or BPA[ state this.