NCP towed my car from train car park for non payment of private parking tickets

[Jamberson]

Its not stolen unless you can prove he doesn't think he has towed it illegally

 

You don't need to prove anything for the police to intervene. I think you're talking about getting a conviction? That's down the line.

[green_and_mean]

You don't need to prove anything for the police to intervene. I think you're talking about getting a conviction? That's down the line.

 

Considering they don't investigate the majority of offences that are actually theft I very much doubt they will spare the time trying to prove a case is a crime.

[Jamberson]

What does that mean?

 

Look - if you loot Curry's and make off with a flat screen TV, the police don't need proof of your intentions or your beliefs, or whether you are offering Curry's the chance to buy it back - they just arrest you on suspicion, and the evidence is made available for court action. The police don't prove things are crimes.

[Raykay]

You don't need to prove anything for the police to intervene. I think you're talking about getting a conviction? That's down the line.

 

The police will require credible evidence to take any action, if NCP are holding the car because they consider that the OP owes them some money, and are willing to restore it once the money is paid, where is the credible evidence of an offence (leaving aside the fact that the claim by NCP is for an unenforceable invoice).

[green_and_mean]

What does that mean?

 

Look - if you loot Curry's and make off with a flat screen TV, the police don't need proof of your intentions or your beliefs, or whether you are offering Curry's the chance to buy it back - they just arrest you on suspicion, and the evidence is made available for court action. The police don't prove things are crimes.

 

With looting is clear a Crime has taken place regardless of the TV, breaking in itself is at the least criminal damage, if Currys went to the Police and said I bought a TV on HP cancelled the direct debit and not made any payments do you think they would send the flying squad around to arrest me?

[jpm321]

After spending the last week trying to get the car with no success

 

went to pound ( recovery guys house ) and called the police who never attended as expected

 

I now need to start an injunction i have form N16a but am a bit stuck with the wording any one have experiance of this form andor suggest the best thing to put

[patdavies]

I agree that theft may be tenuous here; likewise blackmail - it has never gone anywhere near blackmail.

 

However (risking throwing something else into the mix) as the OP has made it clear to NCP that he (as RK) owes no debt, then NCP could be committing extortion.

[Old Snowy]

There is no English and Welsh offence of extortion. The nearest equivalent is Blackmail and in the instant circumstances blackmail is going to be difficult to prove because of the patent lack of guilty knowledge or intent (even though this might exist at some level it is going to be almost impossible to demonstrate). The same applies to theft and aside from the niceties of criminal interpretation the miasma of "civil matter" that surrounds this case is, sadly, going to guarantee that the police steer a wide berth around it.

 

However, I believe that there may well have been a tortious conversion of the car and the detail may also disclose a claim in negligence as it would seem that NCP may have been negligent in assuming that the registered keeper of the vehicle was also the debtor thus setting aside the implications of privity of contract that obtains to any claim they may have.

 

One gets the impression that the seizure of the car has been carried out at a low level in the organisation and unless and until someone further up the food chain within NCP gets to hear of the matter - such as might occur when an order was served on them - little is going to happen. I'd recommend getting some detailed legal advice asap. The longer you leave matters unaddressed the more difficult it is going to be to convince a court to issue an immediate ex parte order (that is issuing an order on hearing the application of the OP only and without giving notice to NCP to respond) which will promptly put the OP back in possession of the car (albeit with the giving of an undertaking to retain it, I suspect).

[jpm321]

Hi

After numerous failed attempts to get the car released

 

I have had to file a claim at the county court for an order to release tthe car under torts (interferening with goods) act 1977 also claimng for damages and expences caused plus interest

I did sned NCP and the recovery guy a copy of the perticulars of claim in a hoep they would see sense

however they didnt.

NCP still claim that I the RK am responsible for all the tickets.

I have told them that i wasnt the driver and they demand proof and with out proof will hold the car

I feel as mentioned above that this is being dealt with at a low level in NCP so when the papers arrive form the court it will be seen by the higher level and they will see what the lower level have done, which will potentiall y damage NCP

 

have been updating on pepipoo as was directed there

 

I did send a covering leter to the court requesting a fixed date at the earliest as need goods released

[queensclose]

keep us updated

[BASFORDLAD2]

Jpm did Ncp say that after you had sent them details if the claim?

[batman1956]

Back to post #21 (terms and conditions) How the hell can the car be driven onto a public road ? Surely then they will have committed an offence, at least driving without insurance. At this point the vehicle will have been used as a conveyance so TWOC as well. Go and get it back using reasonable force with a police presence.

[my-spirit-soars-free]

Back to post #21 (terms and conditions) How the hell can the car be driven onto a public road ? Surely then they will have committed an offence, at least driving without insurance. At this point the vehicle will have been used as a conveyance so TWOC as well. Go and get it back using reasonable force with a police presence.

 

The car was (presumably) not driven, it would have been lifted onto a transporter. TWOC only applies if the car is driven.

[batman1956]

The post referred to states:-

 

'reserve the right to drive you car onto a public highway', as part of the terms and conditions, for the reasons stated before this would be illegal.

[green_and_mean]

The post referred to states:-

 

'reserve the right to drive you car onto a public highway', as part of the terms and conditions, for the reasons stated before this would be illegal.

 

You didn't state any reasons you just made assumprtions, the driver may have a policy to drive any vehicle in the course of his employment. TWOC would not apply because by leaving your car you are agreeing to the terms and condition giving the car park lawful authority to move the vehicle.

[my-spirit-soars-free]

I am assuming that the OP did not leave his car keys behind, so it is unlikely that the car was driven.

[batman1956]

The employee may have a policy to state he may drive any vehicle in the course of their employment but that would only be with the owners permission

[green_and_mean]

The employee may have a policy to state he may drive any vehicle in the course of their employment but that would only be with the owners permission

 

He has got the owners permission the terms of parking state that the vehicle may be moved, next you will be stating that every garage employee is driving without insurance because they don't have express written permission from the owner of the car being repaired. Trying to get your interpretation of the law to fit the circumstances when it clearly doesn't isn't doing anything to help the OP.

[batman1956]

Isnt that what you are trying to do ?

[jpm321]

Jpm did Ncp say that after you had sent them details if the claim?

 

 

Well they keep changing tactics and are saying that the car was banned from the carpark, which it wasnt for non payment of tickets, they say a letter was sent , which was never received

they siad it wasnt nesesary to sent such an inportant notice recorded delivery, however even if this is their defence the NCP terms and condition state clearly that any car trespassing will be removed from the car park

which still doesnt explain why they holding it for disputed debt either way they aint playing ball

[jpm321]

Finally got a statement from NCP on why they took the car....

 

 

"We have taken your banned vehicle because you are banned and as a result of

your continued use of land you are banned from now try to re coup the

revenues you owe us exerting the least possible additional costs to the

same."

 

 

????????

[BASFORDLAD2]

Written by a five year old then...

[jpm321]

Written by a five year old then...

 

 

tried google to see if i can find a 5year to adult convertor !

 

I really thinkits shocking that a company of this size has people like this making serious mistakes in there name

and continuing to comment on behalve of the company.

 

I was expecting to be discussing with the legal dept by now

[green_and_mean]

Have you tried speaking to Trading Standards at the Council?

[jpm321]

Have you tried speaking to Trading Standards at the Council?

 

 

not yet , didnt know whether to let the court date come through and deal with that first

then complaints later