APCOA fake? claim form received, hospital car park/worker, several tickets (£3000 court order) - help [

[Scouse Magic]

The Court Document for Northampton did look a bit suspect as in the top left hand corner, the logo is enlarged and there is no Court Address underneath it.

 

The OP cannot respond to this document, assuming it is real as he / she has already stated that it has been paid so that particlar matter has gone away full stop.

 

There is nothing in employment contracts that relate to parking....This is because some NHS Car Parks are free and in others the price is variable.

 

The OP's partner can either accept the charges if they think it is fair...

...Defend any future court documents if they feel the charge is unfair,

or contact the trust to try to resolve the matter,

 

however I was wondering that if the RK is a "Close Relative" why the OP claims letters were being delivered to him / her on a monthly basis as stated.

[Scouse Magic]

And forgive me for being rude but there are so many Trolls patrolling these sites so If the OP is looking for genuine sound advise, please be honest and upfront in the beginning instead of leading one to believe either you or your partner were getting the letters.....Then any advise you get is tailored to your circumstances

 

One smells a rat !!

 

As for your "Close Relative"...the DR+ letters quote POFA so all the close relative has to do is to supply a serviceable name and address which then discharges their obligation under POFA and thus you can choose how you wish to proceed

Edited September 14, 2013 by Scouse Magic

[zeospeed]

And forgive me for being rude but there are so many Trolls patrolling these sites so If the OP is looking for genuine sound advise, please be honest and upfront in the beginning instead of leading one to believe either you or your partner were getting the letters.....Then any advise you get is tailored to your circumstances

 

One smells a rat !!

 

As for your "Close Relative"...the DR+ letters quote POFA so all the close relative has to do is to supply a serviceable name and address which then discharges their obligation under POFA and thus you can choose how you wish to proceed

 

Apologies, I should have specified that in the start, I didn't think it was relevant who the RK was, as it is whoever is driving the car that is responsible. The close relative was initially worried about these letters, but as my partner and I thought you could ignore these from the start, we just kept picking up the letters from the relatives house as they stacked up. However, not until last week was anything a real threat IMO.

 

Does my relative have to do anything, or can my partner and I proceed as aforementioned (my partner has already taken responsibility by paying the claim form off). Also, she is in the process of changing the RK to her own name (something she should have done before to save some of the hassle).

[esmerobbo]

DR+ have nothing to do with that claim from Apcoa! They cant issue a claim and they certainly can not withdraw it. Are you positive the claim and the DR+ payment are the same? If they are you need to contact Apcoa and make certain the claim is withdrawn. If you don't and its goes through you may well get a default judgement!

 

Don't rely on what DR+ say, as all they are interested in is their commission for collecting.

 

You also need to ensure any further action is taken against your partner not the keeper, or they could end up in a shed load of trouble. (assuming this is post POFA)

 

Another problem you have is it is more difficult to defend multiple charges, you can claim you did not realise what the conditions of parking were when you first parked. However after receiving the first charge that argument has gone. Your then left with unfair contract and/or penalty defence. Judges have come down on both sides of this argument. Many do agree that the charge is an agreed contractual charge others have dismissed it, and others have given judgements for actual losses.

 

If Apcoa really have 20 charges they should issue one claim for them all not individually.

[zeospeed]

DR+ have nothing to do with that claim from Apcoa! They cant issue a claim and they certainly can not withdraw it. Are you positive the claim and the DR+ payment are the same? If they are you need to contact Apcoa and make certain the claim is withdrawn. If you don't and its goes through you may well get a default judgement!

 

Don't rely on what DR+ say, as all they are interested in is their commission for collecting.

 

You also need to ensure any further action is taken against your partner not the keeper, or they could end up in a shed load of trouble. (assuming this is post POFA)

 

Another problem you have is it is more difficult to defend multiple charges, you can claim you did not realise what the conditions of parking were when you first parked. However after receiving the first charge that argument has gone. Your then left with unfair contract and/or penalty defence. Judges have come down on both sides of this argument. Many do agree that the charge is an agreed contractual charge others have dismissed it, and others have given judgements for actual losses.

 

If Apcoa really have 20 charges they should issue one claim for them all not individually.

 

You are correct, the claim form is on behalf of Apcoa (there is no mention of DR+ on it).

 

My partner spoke to Apcoa on Friday, who advised that they have passed the issue onto DR+. DR+ then said that if the amount said on the claim form is paid, that particularly ticket issue won't go to court (however the multiple other tickets just haven't got to court proceeding stage yet, they said that to avoid it we need to cough up the other 3 grand or so to avoid this).

 

APCOA and the hospital car park team are aware that the RK is not involved with this case.

 

I understand the mistakes made by my partner, and know that the best result we can get is to pay off the losses sustained by the NHS trust from the lack of parking tickets (at best this would probably be the value of the tickets themselves, however I guess the trust to claim damages per ticket, I'm not sure how they could justify £140 per ticket).

 

She is going to check on monday if the claim form/court summons was in fact valid, and then speak to APCOA to start the appeals process for the other tickets. AFAIK the court summons issue is sorted for that one ticket as she has paid the charge.

[Scouse Magic]

Well then, you have had lots of good advice so far, but notwithstanding that......The RK can stop the letters by discharging their obligation under POFA.. Then the RK must not be contacted in future by the PPC or their agents

 

Then any future matters are in your own hands......

 

Pay up....if you think the charges are reasonable..

Or defend the matter as being penal and the amount being claimed is disproportionate to the actual loss suffered by the LANDOWNER( you could even offer a gesture of goodwill, without predjudice, say £40.00 = 20x £2.00 or whatever the tariff is?

Or bring it to the attention of the trust....

 

Given you have read about Aintree Court cases etc you must have a plan

 

Regards

[zeospeed]

Well then, you have had lots of good advice so far, but notwithstanding that......The RK can stop the letters by discharging their obligation under POFA.. Then the RK must not be contacted in future by the PPC or their agents

 

Then any future matters are in your own hands......

 

Pay up....if you think the charges are reasonable..

Or defend the matter as being penal and the amount being claimed is disproportionate to the actual loss suffered by the LANDOWNER( you could even offer a gesture of goodwill, without predjudice, say £40.00 = 20x £2.00 or whatever the tariff is?

Or bring it to the attention of the trust....

 

Given you have read about Aintree Court cases etc you must have a plan

 

Regards

 

Thanks for all your help (and thanks to everyone else as well). I will keep the forum posted as to how this pans out.

[havinastella]

If you do pay them £3000 you are completely MAD.

[steampowered]

The crucial thing with these claims is to file a good Defence. You can argue about the legal merits all day long but if an argument is not clearly set out in your Defence (and if you don't understand it enough to explain to the judge in court) then it won't help you.

 

You can use this as a starting point: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?395511-REceived-Court-Papers-From-A-Private-parking-Speculative-invoice-How-To-Deal-With-It-HERE***

 

Given the value of the claim possibly worth getting some professional legal advice on this?

[Scouse Magic]

Swagman, The law is the law and as long as we can argue valid points of law, we will win......I have never lost so far.....

 

How dare you criticise the advice of many genuine posters who have prevented peoples misery from being targeted by fly by night wannabees, who think they deserve £100 for something that has nothing to do with them....

 

If and when I lose my first court case (and you maybe waiting some time) I may look at your one post again.

[renegadeimp]

 

Doubtless the people on here will tell you to ignore me and state that I work for a PPC - You decide if you want to take the chance.

 

Its obvious you work for a ppc. Either that or you have no idea about the subject of which you speak.

[Liverpool way]

Swagman and/or zeospeed....................

 

Parking Eye job description:

 

*Finding potential candidates for ‘further action’ by analysing a number of key websites/forums and the information they provide.

 

Lets talk about the law now shall we ........................................

 

Under contract law the claimant should be entitled only to a sum which would put him in the same position as he would have been in if the breach of contract had not occurred.

 

It is always good to remember that...................

 

Not that i personally have ever breached a parking contract you understand?

Edited September 16, 2013 by Liverpool way
spelling

[Conniff]

 

Doubtless the people on here will tell you to ignore me and state that I work for a PPC - You decide if you want to take the chance.

 

Its obvious you work for a ppc. Either that or you have no idea about the subject of which you speak.

 

Why shouldn't you be ignored, a first post like that can only be classed as trolling.

[themagician]

SWAGMAN , should that not read swag-bag as you lot all seem to think you can just come in take our money then swan off !!! this aint happening we are helping people fight back against high way robbery.

pe have been sending me love letters now since oct 2012 WHY, just take me to court.

OWE you cant can you! it's illegal.

[Surfer01]

The troll is hilarious! Scouse Magic posted up the pdf of the case on CAG where Scouse won and trounced the PCC so go look for it.

[Homer67]

One troll disappears and another one appears, anyone checked the IP addresses for Kirbyinfurnacelad and this muppet?

[esmerobbo]

Swagman try VCS V Ibbotson case No 1SE09849

 

Judge had a very different view on what losses are!

 

JUDGE MciLWAINE: That would depend upon how many notices are issued and at how many

sites, over how long and what your income and expenditure is, and I am certainly not going to go into

a detailed analysis of your company accounts. That is not my job. Mr Ibbotson says, if I find that

your case is correct, that the amount I should award should reflect the loss of the space that he took,

not his contribution to the running of your business. That has , I think, on any interpretation a degree

of force, does it not?

 

JUDGE MciLWAINE: I hear what you say about a contract. The point is about the amount of

damages. The point that Mr Ibbotson has raised is that it is a penalty. You say, "No, it is a pre-agreed

amount of loss". I have looked at the figures which you say are the pre-agreed amount of loss and a

lot of them are , frankly , the costs of the business which are tax deductible or can be written off against

profit, so I again come back to where is your loss , and we will come back to that in a minute.

Edited September 17, 2013 by esmerobbo

[themagician]

ok numpty,you have all our reg no's and addresses so why do you persist in sending all these pointless threats &" love you loads"letters as long as you keep sending us your hard earnd cash.

now its must be quicker and easier if we, go past go, do not collect £200 and go straight to court"simples".

sorry it sounds complicated to you!.

BRING IT ON!

[Conniff]

Swagman has gone to take the dog for a walk.

[themagician]

Swagman has gone to take the dog for a walk.

who's walking who? and which one tells the tail to wag! ????.

[Surfer01]

Since when does government "guidelines" apply as law?

[Scouse Magic]

I thought the OP was contacting the court on monday to confirm if the documents were real ????????????

[Liverpool way]

I think you will find that the original poster and swagman are one and the same..............

 

All I will say is this.........As much as I find this all highly entertaining and smacking of desperation on the trolls part, now it is time for you to really take your dog for a walk and do one!

 

Then us genuine caggers can get on with the matters in hand.

[dw190]

It refers to the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 which is law.

 

Which is only as good as its interpretation.

[themagician]

Send me your reference numbers then Keyboard Warrior and I will do as you wish - As you say Bring it on!

if keyboard warrior complies with your request ,where does he send his speculative invoice & begging letter to ??,and it seems its for the same amount as the speculative invoice you probably sent to him,funny that innit!

p.s we wont give you a reduction if you pay within 14 days.

you can always sell your granny.