UK CPM (CPM) PCN for not displaying valid permit

[pixie888]

Hi Guys,

 

Really hoping someone can help me with this as have read several forums now

and I'm really confused/worried on what I should do next.

 

I'll give an overview of what's happened and have also answered the questions suggested in other threads below..

 

.if someone could please help me with this I'd be really grateful:

 

A few weeks ago on 2nd June I parked on what I thought was a side street,

there were double yellow lines on the main road and the double yellow lines stopped at the entrance of the side street.

 

There was an office on the left to where I parked which had a gated entrance

and a sign attached saying "Private Property" which looks like the area beyond the gate is private.

 

On the left hand side of the road there were also yellow hazard/no parking cones.

On the right hand side (the side that I parked on) there were no cones and no signs either.

 

There were also no signs at the entrance of the street which is why I believed it to be a public road.

 

On the right hand side a few yards from the road there is a warehouse type building with "Private Property" signs on its wall,

 

 

between the wall and the road there is a wooden barrier and between the barrier

and the warehouse wall there is an area for cars to park which looks like a private car park

for the warehouse which gives the impression that the private property signs are for this area.

I parked here for 15 minutes

 

upon my return found a sticker stuck to my drivers side mirror,

telling me I've been issued a fine and to contact the number provided for parking advice.

 

I called the number and it put me through to Leeds City Council who then confirmed they had issued no fine.

I threw the sticker away assuming it was someone trying to scare monger.

 

A week later I received the attached CPM Letter 1.

 

The letter says I was being charged for not Displaying a Valid Permit

but it wasn't clear that you had to display a permit to park on this street

and the photos they've taken are at a weird angle.

 

I then looked this up online and sent a letter back to them which was recommended on one of the forums I read,

please see attached Letter sent to UKCPM.

 

I have received a letter back and I now don't know what to do next,

please see the attachment CPM Letter 2.

 

They haven't answered any of my questions and refer me to a website to review the photos they took online.

 

The information on this is slightly different as online it says the time of issue is 14:29 but the 1st PCN letter says 14:00.

14:29 is definitely not correct as I was back at my car by 14:20.

 

On their signs and 2nd letter to me they've referred to being members of BPA but in the first letter they've referred to IPC.

 

On the BPA site they don't appear to be members.

 

Please can someone advise me on what I should do next,

this has never happened to me before :

 

'( I hope I've given enough information. I have some photos of the street where I parked which I'll post below.

 

For tickets received through the post (Notice to Keeper) please answer the following questions:

 

1 Date of the infringement – 02/06/2016

 

2 Date on the NTK – 08/06/2016

3 Date received – 13/06/2016

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? - NO

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? – YES – please see letter attached (CPM Letter 1)

6 Have you appealed? Have you had a response?

 

I’ve not appealed but I have sent a letter requesting more information and received a reply,

please see attachments Letter sent to UKCPM and CPM Letter 2

 

7 Who is the parking company? – UK Car Park Management (CPM)

8 For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under.

There are two official bodies, the BPA and the IAS – YES its IAS

9 If you have received any other correspondence, please mention it here – no further correspondence as yet.

Attached are photos of the entrance to the side street where I parked and different views of where I parked.

 

Attached is another photo showing the entrance to the side street from the main road,

Private Property sign, warehouse, the land that looks like a private car park outside the warehouse

next to the side street and the gated entrance with the sign on the gate.

 

I hope these photos help.

CPM Letter 2.pdf

CPM Letter 1.pdf

Letter sent to UK Car Park Management June 2016.pdf

Pics 1.pdf

[honeybee13]

Hello and welcome to CAG.

 

I've removed your letter to CPM because you left your name and address showing. You've also left your car registration in the photos and correspondence. I would block it out, but it's up to you.

 

Letters removed.

 

I like your username, it reminds me of a cat I had.

 

You've still got your reg no further down in the CPM1 letter, pixie888.

[ericsbrother]

well,

their claim refers to signage in a car park and you werent in a car park.

Their miniscule signs on the wall of the nearest building is the other side of a barrier

so to the casual observer they apply to that demarcated land and not the highway.

 

 

There is no sign at the entrance to the land so there is nothing to consider as an offer of a contract.

I cannot see anything about needing a permit and if you did need a permit then that would prohibit anyone without a permit from parking and prohibition is not a contractual consideration and would be a matter for the landowner and not them.

 

In short,

you cannot be in breach of a contract that does not exist.

they will lose any proper argument over this but as they are greedy

and not the sharpest pencil in the box they wont ever admit they are wrong.

 

The letter to the keeper is not compliant with the POFA as it doesnt have a servicable address for legal documents.

 

What to do next?

well, you have created a paper trial and they havent shown that they do have authority to make claims

or enetre into contracts so keep the letters safe and ignore anything else they send

apart from a properly headed Letter before Action.

 

 

This waiting game is tough as everyone wants it to all end as soon as possible

but they rely on threats and bluff to collect their money and generally it works

otherwise they would have been out of business 2 years ago.

[honeybee13]

Thankyou Honeybee, please could you remove it and replace it with this one? [ATTACH=CONFIG]63822[/ATTACH]

 

Thanks so much!

 

Cheers,

 

pixie888

 

Hi Pixie.

 

I've removed all the images from your previous post, suggest you upload the new ones here.

 

HB

[pixie888]

Hi ericsbrother,

 

I didn't realise you'd replied to me till now, apologies for the delay. Thank you so much for your advice, really appreciate it! All that you say makes complete sense.

 

They've sent me another letter which I've attached, do you suggest I still ignore?

 

Thank you so much again for your help

 

Many Thanks,

 

pixie888

 

 

 

well, their claim refers to signage in a car park and you werent in a car park. Their miniscule signs on the wall of the nearest building is the other side of a barrier so to the casual observer they apply to that demarcated land and not the highway. There is no sign at the entrance to the land so there is nothing to consider as an offer of a contract. I cannot see anything about needing a permit and if you did need a permit then that would prohibit anyone without a permit from parking and prohibition is not a contractual consideration and would be a matter for the landowner and not them.

In short, you cannot be in breach of a contract that does not exist. Basically they will lose any proper argument over this but as they are greedy and not the sharpest pencil in the box they wont ever admit they are wrong.

The letter to the keeper is not compliant with the POFA as it doesnt have a servicable address for legal documents.

What to do next? well, you have created a paper trial and they havent shown that they do have authority to make claims or enetre into contracts so keep the letters safe and ignore anything else they send apart from a properly headed Letter before Action. This waiting game is tough as everyone wants it to all end as soon as possible but they rely on threats and bluff to collect their money and generally it works otherwise they would have been out of business 2 years ago.

CPM Formal Demand.pdf

[dx100uk]

you've still left ref numbers on your latest uploads.

 

 

leave 'em be i'll sort them.

[dx100uk]

done and those in post 1 and thread tidied

[ericsbrother]

advice remains unchanged.

 

Either tell them to get lost as no contractual obligation and invite them to try and try again or ignore them and they will then either have to go away or get tough and pay the silly people at Gladstones to write to you.

 

It may be wiser to let that happen and then tell gladdys they dont have a hope in hell of doing anything other than losing another client money and shorten the life of the IPC as a going concern.

 

That way if they do go for the big one you can claim for full costs recovery under CPR 27.14 as they know the claim is rubbish

[pixie888]

Great, thank you for your help ericsbrother!! I'm really grateful.

 

 

Will take your advice and see if they pester me anymore, fingers crossed they don't.

 

Have a great evening.

Cheers,

 

pixie888

[pixie888]

Hi @ericsbrother

 

I've received two further letters..

..now from Debt Recovery Plus and I was hoping for some further advice on what I should do please?

 

 

Starting to panic, plus I am now out of the country as I moved abroad this month...eeek!

 

Any advice from yourself or anyone else would be really appreciated. I've attached the two letters I have received.

 

Cheers

 

pixie888

[dx100uk]

you can safely ignore DR+

a DCA is NOT A BAILIFF

and have

NO LEGAL POWERS

[ericsbrother]

this is called a threatogram. Ignore completely, DR+ have no interest in any matter ever.

ask yourself why it has suddenly become £149- did you sign a credit agreement with DRP when you parked? If not you should know that this is just cobblers as they dont have a consumer credit licence anyway so they arnet legally entitled to handle the money. this means tha if you pay them and they dont pay the parking co you still owe the parking co so why would you give them anything in the first place?

all this has been said often enough

[pixie888]

Thanks for your advice @dx100uk and @ericsbrother after looking up UK Car Park Management I've found they are not members of either BPA or IAS that they refer to. Debt Recovery Plus is a member of IAS though. I've never experienced anything like this before so started to worry when I got these 2 letters. Thanks so much for your help! Much appreciated.

 

Cheers

Edited September 27, 2016 by pixie888

[ericsbrother]

you could join the IAS as an associate or social member if you wish. You get to use the lounge bar but not attend those crucial meetings of full members where they decide who is going to open the next window on the advent calendar

[pixie888]

:lol:

[T25]

you could join the IAS as an associate or social member if you wish. You get to use the lounge bar but not attend those crucial meetings of full members where they decide who is going to open the next window on the advent calendar

:lol:

[pixie888]

Hi, need your help again please,

 

 

now I've received this letter from Gladstones Solicitors, wasn't expecting to get this

 

 

now I'm not sure what to do.

 

 

Would be really grateful for any advice.

 

Cheers,

 

Melissa

[pixie888]

@ericsbrother and @dx100uk please could you help me again? Thanks so much in advance

[dx100uk]

Ignore

 

Nothing they can do

[ericsbrother]

it is a begging letter where they have added a fat slice to the amount claimed for themselves as they think that if you are going to pay you may as well pay them a fortune

[pixie888]

Ok thank you so much both for your prompt reply. The letter talks about legal action, do you think they will take me to court?

[ericsbrother]

this is what is known as a threatogram designed to frighten you into paying monies that are not due. Legal action? well yes they could but only if their client pays them to do so and then they risk losing because their claim is rubbish so it is a numbers game for them.

[ericsbrother]

they wont win a court case because their NTK isnt pomliant with the POFA on a number of grounds so no keeper liability. They also have the problem that they are claiming money fro a breach of contract when it is a metter of prohibition and thus nothing to do with them as trespass is down to the landowner to sue for damages and these bandits arent the landowner. beavis doesnt apply to trespass so the landowner can only recover any true loss caused by the damges inflicted bythe car being on a metalled road and that will be zero. (they didnt have to dig the road up whne you left)