ECP PCN - 'Not Parked in Marked Bay' - NHS Foundation Trust

[Beesnees]

Missus got 'just the ticket' from euro in a hospital car park today for 'Not Parked In Marked Bay'.

 

 

She believed she was well within a bay - other cars similarly parked, and a (faded) white line behind the car.

 

 

I'm the registered keeper, and she's a named driver on our insurance policy.

 

 

I'm not totally up to speed with current protocols.

 

 

Do I 'appeal' straight away to invoke POPLA procedure, or await NTK from them?

 

If this needs to become a separate thread, by all means do your stuff.

 

 

And thx in advance for any help in putting this one to rest.

 

 

FYI, last time I got a speculative invoice from them in almost identical circumstances (c. 2-3 yrs ago), I just ignored it.

 

 

Didn't hear so much as a pipsqueak from them.

 

 

Nothing. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Not even a threatening letter. I was devastated.

[armadillo71]

Beesnees said:

Ha, spoke too soon. Missus got 'just the ticket' from PE in a hospital car park today for 'Not Parked In Marked Bay'. She believed she was well within a bay - other cars similarly parked, and a (faded) white line behind the car. I'm the registered keeper, and she's a named driver on our insurance policy. I'm not totally up to speed with current protocols. Do I 'appeal' straight away to invoke POPLA procedure, or await NTK from them?

 

If this needs to become a separate thread, by all means do your stuff. And thx in advance for any help in putting this one to rest. FYI, last time I got a speculative invoice from them in almost identical circumstances (c. 2-3 yrs ago), I just ignored it. Didn't hear so much as a pipsqueak from them. Nothing. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Not even a threatening letter. I was devastated.

 

As this is a NTD, then wait for the NTK in the post.

 

Could you post up a redacted copy of the NTD from PE please?

As they are unusual...

 

Unusual? Really? Can I take it for valuation on the ARS then? It's such an attractive number - a handy little 'leaflet' of no less than 6 pages all told. If it wasn't needed for my records, it would have substituted for toilet paper in an emergency. But seriously, do you need all 6 pages, or just the business end of this piece of garbage?

 

You said it was a NTD? For parking not in a marked bay.

How is that 6 pages?

 

Well, if you don't know, then it clearly is an unusual item & therefore worthy of closer inspection. I'll post up all 6 pages so you can see for yourself. But next time you get an urge to read War & Peace, just read this masterpiece instead. It'll soon cure you of your urge.

 

Apologies. Just noticed one of the pages (How to pay.....) is repeated twice, so 'only' 4 unique pages. They obviously wanna make sure we get the message about how to pay. I'm straining at the leash to comply with their request, so somebody, please hold me back.

 

Been quite some time since I've done this, so hoping it works:

 

Oops, just noticed it's euro car parks, not PE. My bad. Apologies (again) to you armadillo for causing so much confusion. Hopefully, my mistake doesn't make a material difference to the way forward.

[ericsbrother]

Euro? Well that means that you are likely to win at the first hurdle as unless they have changed their ways their methods of payment will include unlawful demands so making the formation of a contract with them an unconscionable act and also nullifying anyy contract you may have entered.

Do they still have the £2.50 card charge fee etc? If so, when you raise that point they normally go quiet.

Still wait for the NTK and cost them a few quid to chase you then make demands about proof of misbehaviour on the druivers part regarding white lines and also ask about standard sizes of parking bays and how they are marked etc.

[Beesnees]

Do they still have the £2.50 card charge fee etc?

 

Yes, they surely do ericsbro. Check around the middle of the last page for a really good larrfff.

[ericsbrother]

then they will never do court claims , they dont want to get done by trading standards.

Wait for NTK and then tell them that no contract entered into because of their law breaking and invite them to go straight to court if they think they are right and you are wrong.

 

Quote

Still wait for the NTK and cost them a few quid to chase you then make demands about proof of misbehaviour on the druivers part regarding white lines and also ask about standard sizes of parking bays and how they are marked etc.

Really? You mean I hafta take 'em seriously? Can't I put in a risible defence (eg The driver was instructed to park in precisely that spot by an extra-terrestrial from the planet Zargon. She did her best to refuse, but found the alien's other-worldly powers just too much for her feeble mind to resist). If that fails, and I can't understand why it would, then presumably I get my POPLA appeal code, no?

 

Sorry ericsbro, I didn't mean to sound flippant. I just wanna make 'em expend as much energy, time, resources, etc. as possible pursuing a hopeless cause. This is personal.

[armadillo71]

Oops, just noticed it's euro car parks, not PE. My bad. Apologies (again) to you armadillo for causing so much confusion. Hopefully, my mistake doesn't make a material difference to the way forward.

 

 

 

I've only seen one PE windscreen NTD before, so was surprised you said you had one...

 

 

The NTD you have from Euro does not mention the POFA 2012, so lets see what the NTK states when or if you get one.

Keep us updated please.

 

 

Out of interest, which hospital trust was the car park part of?

[Beesnees]

The NTD you have from Euro does not mention the POFA 2012, so lets see what the NTK states when or if you get one.

Keep us updated please.

 

Out of interest, which hospital trust was the car park part of?

 

1. Not sure I fully understand the significance of their failure to mention POFA 2012. I assume that means their position is thereby compromised even more than it is already?

2. The car park (& hospital) are part of Oxleas NHS Foundation Trust.

3. Based on precedent, my guess is that I won't hear anything further from them, but I can always live in hope. Either way, of course I'll update here.

 

Many thanks to both you & ericsbro for your help & advice. Appreciated.

[Beesnees]

thread tidied

 

Sorry dx100, but I don't see any evidence of that, or even your post. Maybe the thread just failed to update? Anyroad, this part of the thread starts at post #11 with 'Ha. Spoke too soon.......' It should then make more sense, except for the original headers. Sorry for complicating matters. I'll start afresh if there's a next time.

[ericsbrother]

the point of my argument is that they cannot answer it as there is no answer so how can they determine you were parked outside a bay when they dont exist?

By answering their demand ( when it comes) you show that you are prepared to take the matter on and they usually dont bother you after that.

[Beesnees]

the point of my argument is that they cannot answer it as there is no answer so how can they determine you were parked outside a bay when they dont exist?

By answering their demand ( when it comes) you show that you are prepared to take the matter on and they usually dont bother you after that.

 

I wasn't necessarily disputing the need to respond to any NTK I may receive,

but whether they even had the right (or deserved) to be taken seriously

- hence my facile 'defence' of alien intervention.

 

 

But hey, you're the experts, & I take your advice on board.

 

 

If it's simply a case of stating that floor graffiti has no enforceable basis in law, I'm more than happy to put them in their place.

 

 

But by doing so (and thereby taking them seriously), what are the chances that I'll simply be inviting a round of mail tennis?

[ericsbrother]

They have to follow the protocols so I always advise where these are being followed that people follow the timescales

and let the parking company spend their money chasing you

and possibly making mistakes that renders their claim defective before it gets to the final stage.

 

 

Parking Eye generally get their paperwork out in the right order and time scale but are known to tell lies to POPLA and judges,

 

 

Euro tend to bottle out when you tell them they are breaking the law with their demands for charging a fee to rob you and then they go quiet.

 

 

However, if they dont using the procedures properly does do for them and they know it so it isnt any more onerous to do it properly

and gives a proper paper trail

 

 

whereas making claims that are not relevant leaves them guessing about your intentions

and they then often push a bit harder themselves on the basis that you might ignore the rejection of appeal

or spoil the appeal and allow them to win by a walkover.

This is not the same as rolling over to them, it is letting them know in robust terms that they have been rumbled and you will use the law to beat them at their rotten games.

[armadillo71]

↑↑ + 1 ↑↑

[Beesnees]

They have to follow the protocols so I always advise where these are being followed that people follow the timescales and let the parking company spend their money chasing you and possibly making mistakes that renders their claim defective before it gets to the final stage. Parking Eye generally get their paperwork out in the right order and time scale but are known to tell lies to POPLA and judges, Euro tend to bottle out when you tell them they are breaking the law with their demands for charging a fee to rob you and then they go quiet. However, if they dont using the procedures properly does do for them and they know it so it isnt any more onerous to do it properly and gives a proper paper trail whereas making claims that are not relevant leaves them guessing about your intentions and they then often push a bit harder themselves on the basis that you might ignore the rejection of appeal or spoil the appeal and allow them to win by a walkover.

This is not the same as rolling over to them, it is letting them know in robust terms that they have been rumbled and you will use the law to beat them at their rotten games.

 

Fair enough, and yeah, kinda makes sense if a fatuous defence means I might shoot myself in the foot. Don't really wanna give 'em any ammo, so I'll await that NTK. Thanks.

 

dx100 - Thanks for the edit.

 

armadillo - Huh?

[armadillo71]

↑↑ + 1 ↑↑

 

 

I agreed with the above post. ( #19)

[Beesnees]

I agreed with the above post. ( #19)

 

Thanks. Thought it might mean everything has moved up coz of the edit.

[Beesnees]

Well, it's been a week since the expiry of the 28 day payment period. Heard nothing from them to date, but not sure if that's significant yet. Bearing in mind we are currently in a holiday period as well. Are there any time limits they hafta observe for follow-up?

 

Oops, spoke too soon (again). Had a feeling it should have arrived by now. I'll post up shortly, just as soon as I've made myself a nice cuppa.

[dx100uk]

HOW TO UPLOAD DOCUMENTS / IMAGES ON CAG IMMEDIATELY YOU DO NOT NEED 10 POSTS

.

IMPORTANT To protect your IDENTITY and ensure you remain ANONYMOUS on CAG

YOU MUST ensure that you REMOVE all Personal Information including Barcodes, Names, Addresses etc

.

ENSURE: To leave all Monetary Figures and Dates.

.

DO NOT USE A BIRO, PEN, SEE THRU TAPE OR LABELS TO EDIT THE INFORMATION

.

1. SCAN YOUR DOCUMENT

.

- Set your default scan page size to A4 less than 300 DPI (150 will do)

- Scan the required letters/agreements/sheets - as a picture (jpg) file

.

- Don't forget you can use a mobile phone or a digital camera too!!

.

- If you have multiple scans/pictures

please put these into WORD and make a multi page document

.

first ensuring you have removed all Personal Information before converting to PDF.

if you dont have MSOFFICE, use openoffice its free and has a PDF converter.

- IPHONE ONLY: Take a picture and Convert to PDF via an APP

.

2. HOW TO EDIT (Remove Personal Information)

.

- Do this using MSPAINT.EXE or any Photo Editing program and ensure to save the document.

PLEASE TRY AND REFRAIN FROM POSTING FILES OF +1Mb in size

a single sheet of a4 should be about 50kb.

.

.

3. HOW TO CONVERT YOUR DOCUMENT TO PDF

.

- If you have OFFICE installed this has an installable PRINT to PDF option so use this and save as PDF.

- If you have PDF as an installed driver use this program and save as PDF.

.

OR Go to one of the many free online pdf converter websites:

.

- http://freejpgtopdf.com/

- http://www.convert-jpg-to-pdf.net/

- http://www.freepdfconvert.com/

- http://www.pdfmerge.com/

- http://www.primopdf.com/

.

PLEASE REMEMBER: It would be better to upload a Multi-page PDF rather than multiple Single PDFs.

.

4. BEFORE UPLOADING YOUR DOCUMENT ON CAG

.

- Logically Name your PDF File so Users know what it is. DO NOT NAME YOUR FILE USING BANK NAMES OR CAG IN THE TITLE

.

- For Example: Default Notice DDicon-MM-YYYY.

.

IMPORTANT To protect your IDENTITY and ensure you remain ANONYMOUS on CAG please ensure that you do a final check that all Personal Information including Barcodes, Names, Addresses etc. are REMOVED before carrying out the NEXT STEP

.

5. HOW TO UPLOAD YOUR DOCUMENT ON CAG

.

- In your Thread/Post open a new msg box here.

- Click 'Go Advanced' below the msg box.

- Click 'Manage Attachments' below that box.

- Click the 'Add Files' button on the top right.

- Click 'Select Files', navigate to your file(s) on your PC.

- Click 'Upload Files'.

.

- You DON’T have to put a link to the attachment in the msg box just upload it ……… JOB DONE

- You can click on your links to check them too!!

.

[armadillo71]

Ntk:

 

Nope, I can see thru the blackout, so no good. I'll hafta do a more thorough job.

 

Please stop trying...

 

Breach of terms and conditions - 'Failure to adhere to signage on site'.

 

That means that the charge has to be a genuine pre estimate of loss.

[Beesnees]

Thanks for the refresher dx.

 

Armadillo - what loss?

 

 

A parking ticket was purchased and displayed.

 

 

As far as the missus is concerned, she parked within a defined bay, as others have at the time and since.

She has seen the same space occupied by other vehicles on multiple occasions since,

so if she made a mistake, she is not alone.

 

 

Presumably, those other unwitting motorists received similar 'invoices'.

 

 

So the 'loss' incurred resulted from parking in a space other than that designated for parking.

Unless they are going to rely on some absurd argument (such as this space is reserved exclusively for a burger van or similar),

I don't see how GPEOL applies here.

 

 

But if you're suggesting that is the grounds of my appeal when I wasn't even the driver at the time, then I'll draft something along those lines.

 

As for giving up on posting the NTK, are you saying it's no longer needed or relevant?

 

I'll give it one more try later after Star Trek (Nxt Gen.) & a snack, bearing in mind the 'how to' tutorial above. Thanks for deleting all the rubbish.

 

Hoping this works.

 

By jove, I think I've done it. Yippee.

 

Guess you guys might be taking a well-earned rest, so this can wait till after the hols.

 

The para. in the middle of p.1 looks interesting from a sabre-rattling point of view. It suggests they can recover from me regardless of who the driver was at the time, and more so if I don't cooperate in giving them 'a serviceable address for the driver'. Not that I'm in the least bit worried by this drivel, but I assume they're talking thru their backsides here as well?

 

And please note those handling charges for postal and web payments.

[armadillo71]

The para. in the middle of p.1 looks interesting from a sabre-rattling point of view. It suggests they can recover from me regardless of who the driver was at the time, and more so if I don't cooperate in giving them 'a serviceable address for the driver'. Not that I'm in the least bit worried by this drivel, but I assume they're talking thru their backsides here as well?

 

And please note those handling charges for postal and web payments.

 

Read this;

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted

 

see if ecp are following the criteria for keeper liability.

[Beesnees]

Well, as far as I understand it, they fall at the first hurdle. They can indeed recover from the RK, providing 4 conditions are met:

 

Conditions that must be met for purposes of paragraph 4

 

5(1)The first condition is that the creditor—

 

(a)has the right to enforce against the driver of the vehicle the requirement to pay the unpaid parking charges;

Aye, there's the rub. The right to enforce against the driver is precisely what is in dispute here, so we're back at square one. They have no grounds to proceed against me unless they first establish enforcement grounds against the driver. Until they do, I see no obligation for disclosing the driver's ID.

 

So this is what I would like to write them based on your advice above. I know it's a bit pompous and OTT, but I'm more interested in correcting any legal errors or deficiencies rather than matters of style.

 

Sirs,

 

Your Ref: XXXXXXXX

 

I write in response to your fraudulent and risible attempt to extort money from me under false pretences, and under the guise of a contract that is both non-existent and non-enforceable at law. Your illegal practice of adding 'handling charges' to various methods of payment is alone sufficient to render any purported contractual relationship between yourselves and the driver utterly null and void.

 

That is also quite apart from your complete failure to produce any evidence that the driver has misbehaved in relation to marked parking bays, for which the driver maintains full compliance and in accordance with observed usage by other drivers on numerous occasions, both on the day and subsequent to the alleged infringement.

 

If you have any evidence to the contrary, then by all means produce it. And whilst you're at it, perhaps you would also be good enough to furnish me with a schedule of the losses you have incurred as a direct result of this alleged breach of a non-existent contract.

 

If you think I am wrong, I invite you to proceed immediately to litigation, failing which I will neither entertain nor engage in any further correspondence with you regarding this matter.

 

Yours etc.,

XX X X XXXXXX

[ericsbrother]

there is no requiremnt to name the driver.

 

 

Their claim for brach of contract says failing to adhere to signage on site is NOT an an indication of a breach,

they must say how you have broken that contract so they must tell you what it is that has been doen to make that statement justifiable.

 

Also, they ask for a "handling charge" for paying them.

 

 

This is illegal as it doesnt reflect their costs in processing that payment.

 

 

When you appeal you should point both of these facts out to them.

 

 

They know full well already but still do it because it is free money for them- no VAT, no tax applied as it will be accounted for against other costs.

 

 

Essentially these companies rely on these untruths and outright frauds to stay in business

as the money they get from the regular business activity makes them a loss.

 

Your letter makes these points but do rub in the lack of compliant notice to keeper by failing to say what the breach actually was.

[Beesnees]

ok, I'll redraft to include that point and emphasize another. Thanks.

 

Their claim for brach of contract says failing to adhere to signage on site is NOT an an indication of a breach, they must say how you have broken that contract so they must tell you what it is that has been doen to make that statement justifiable.

Except that the NTD states 'Not Parked in Marked Bay'. Doesn't that meet the requirement for describing the nature of the alleged breach?

 

There is also the point that asking them to justify their claim of a breach could be construed as a tacit admission that a contract exists. Isn't it a basic premise of my defence that there is no such contract between them and the driver?

[dx100uk]

all tarmac lines are purely graffiti with no standing in any court of law or contract

 

 

dx

[Beesnees]

True enough dx, and I might usefully make a point of that as well. Still doesn't quite address my point of the disputed existence of this mysterious contract. FYI, the missus says she saw no signage (not that she went out of her way to look for any), so presumably she cannot in any case be bound by something of which she had no knowledge.

 

How about this then:

 

Sirs,

 

Your Ref: XXXXXXXX

 

I write in response to your fraudulent and risible attempt to extort money from me under false pretences - namely, under the guise of a non-existent contract that is by definition non-enforceable at law. In particular, I would like to make reference to and rely on the following points in the event that you insist on pursuing me for this spurious charge:

 

Your claim on page 1 of your Notice to Keeper, namely that you have the right to recover any unpaid charges from me, are demonstrably false. You have no such right unless certain conditions are met, and one of these conditions is: 'that the creditor—

(a) has the right to enforce against the driver of the vehicle the requirement to pay the unpaid parking charges'.

 

No such right has been established in law against the driver, and any claim to the contrary will be vigorously contested on the following grounds:

 

1. You have not established that an enforceable contract exists between you and the driver. Beyond the obligation to buy and display a ticket, the driver was not aware of any other terms that could be breached or construed as forming the basis of a contract with you.

 

2. Your illegal practice of adding 'handling charges' to various methods of payment is sufficient to render any purported contractual relationship between yourselves and the driver null and void.

 

3. You have not yet provided me with a compliant notice that expressly states how the driver failed to adhere to on-site signage. or any proof thereof.

 

In the unlikely event that you are able to prove in a court of law that a contract both exists and has been breached by a failure to comply with its terms, I will request a fully itemised and costed schedule of losses that you have incurred as a direct result of this alleged breach. You will either justify this charge, or else concede that it is an extremely feeble attempt at extortion that relies on general ignorance of the law.

 

Furthermore, if you think and believe that I am wrong in any of the above particulars, I invite you to proceed immediately to litigation without further reference to me, failing which I will neither entertain nor engage in any further correspondence with you regarding this matter.

 

Yours etc.,

XX X X XXXXXX

I've re-jigged my 'appeal' a bit more, & hope it now covers all the salient points. Would be obliged if you could delete the previous versions to reduce thread length, etc. If I've left anything out or made a factual/legal error, please let me know. I think it would also be useful if you could let me have the source/link/quote/ref. etc for the illegality of handling charges. In the absence of any suggestions for improvement, corrections, etc., I intend sending it off by post around the middle of next week.

 

Sirs,

 

Your Ref: XXXXXXXX

 

I write in response to your fraudulent and risible attempt to extort money from me under false pretences - namely, under the guise of a non-existent contract that is by definition non-enforceable at law. In particular, I would like to make reference to and rely on the following points in the event that you insist on pursuing me for this spurious charge:

 

Your claim on p.1 of your Notice to Keeper, namely that you have the right to recover any unpaid charges from me, are demonstrably false. You have no such right unless certain conditions are met, one of which is: 'that the creditor—

(a) has the right to enforce against the driver of the vehicle the requirement to pay the unpaid parking charges'.

 

No such right has been established in law against the driver, and any claim to the contrary will be contested on the following grounds:

 

1. You have not established that an enforceable contract exists between you and the driver. Beyond the general obligation to buy and display a ticket, the driver was not aware of any other terms that could be breached or construed as forming the basis of a contract with you.

 

2. No contract was therefore knowingly, consciously, or voluntarily entered into or agreed between you and the driver prior to its alleged infraction. It is up to you to prove that such a contract exists, and not up to me or the driver to prove that it doesn't.

 

3. Your illegal practice of adding 'handling charges' to various methods of payment is alone sufficient to render any purported contractual relationship between yourselves and the driver null and void. (citation needed?)

 

4. You have not yet provided me with a compliant notice that expressly states how the driver failed to adhere to on-site signage. or any proof thereof. What exactly was the action performed by the driver that constitutes the alleged breach? What terms or conditions were breached thereby, and where & how are they stated in the on-site signage?

 

5. Precisely what loss did you suffer as a result of the driver's alleged oversight of a piece of 'ground graffiti' that has no legal standing or protection? You will either justify this charge, or else concede that it is a brazen attempt at extortion that relies exclusively on general ignorance of the law by the public.

 

6. Further to the above point no.5, in the extremely unlikely event that you are able to prove in a court of law that a contract both exists and has been breached by the driver, I will request a genuine pre-estimate of the losses that you maintain have been incurred as a direct result of the alleged breach, by way of a fully itemised and costed schedule that justifies your charge.

 

If you think and believe that I am wrong in any of the above particulars, I invite you to proceed directly and immediately to litigation without further reference to me. I therefore look forward to receiving court papers pursuant to your fraudulent claim in due course, failing which I will neither entertain nor engage in any further correspondence with you regarding this matter.

 

 

Yours etc.,

XX X X XXXXXX

 

PS You should also note that proof of postage for this 'appeal' has been obtained and will be retained until you are out of time for pursuing me for your fictitious charge.