Central Ticketing? Anyone heard of them???

[ScarletPimpernel]

So I will close off now,as Im getting bored - I will not be bothering to respond to ANY comment on this board ...

 

 

To paraphrase Churchill on the Americans:

 

Perky can be relied upon to do the right thing - after he has tried everything else...

[JetSetWilly]

Perky,

 

Jus wanted to say thanks also for your advice. I appreciate it.

 

As i mentioned in an earlier post, this is my first ticket - and I believe, an unfair one at that!

 

It would be so easy just to pay up to these [causing problems] vultures, but why should we?

 

I am glad that people like yourself take the time to help others in my position and i feel it would be a terrible shame if you decided that you could not assist others in the future.

 

Kind regards

Wil

[Guest 1594matt]

Hi swisstoni & JetSetWilly.

 

It looks like we've all been bitten by the same diseased rat! (Otherwise known as 'Central Ticketing').

 

I was also on a 'free to patrons' car park, and received a 'PARKING CHARGE' on my windscreen when I returned to my car. When I phoned them to question it, I was advised that I 'walked off site'.

 

'What? For FIVE minutes?' was my reply.

 

Would you by any chance be referring to Moorgate 'retail park' in Bury, which has a Halfords & Comet?

 

Let me tell you my situation. I parked up in the pouring rain, and RAN over to Wilkinsons, which is literally 400 yards down the road. I then returned to the retail park and visited Halfords. With neither of the stores having what I was shopping for, the duration of my stay was no longer than TEN minutes.

 

I looked at the time stated on the ticket (14:06), and then looked at my watch (14:15). They obviously issued the ticket the moment I set foot out of the car park.

 

Obviously I have no intention of paying the £60 they are asking for, but what can I say in my appeal?

 

The signs themselves were questionable, since the rule that I was done for was added to the original sign by means of a yellow strip containing the additional wording.

 

Also, on closer inspection of the ticket, I noticed that on the reverse side, there are Parts 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 & 10 referring to different points. Part 4 is on the front of the ticket, and refers to Payment. Which leaves me with the question... Where is PART 1??

 

I would appreciate any help that you experts could offer me in this matter, because as you can imagine, I've lost sleep over this and there is NO WAY I'm going to give in to these greedy vermin.

 

Keep up the great work everyone! This is an awesome forum!! :D:D

 

Matt

[swisstoni]

Would you by any chance be referring to Moorgate 'retail park' in Bury, which has a Halfords & Comet?

 

Yes I Would.

 

My advice is to just not pay it. Just read around on here particularily this thread:-

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/parking-traffic-wardens/65341-private-parking-companies-charges.html

 

Don't worry about their mis-informed threats. If they continue to pester you, send them a letter along the lines of:-

 

I see your charge as unlawful, uneforceable and I am not liable. I will not be providing any payment and your continued pursuit of this matter will constitute an offence under the Protection From Harassment Act 1997. I consider the matter closed and am explicitly instructing you not to contact me again for any reason

(Credit to original poster Petej2811)

 

Sleep Well Tonight Matt

 

SwissT

[Guest 1594matt]

Thank you SwissT.

 

Is that what you did? Just not pay them and not contact them at all?

 

Of course I have no intentions of paying them a penny, but I was going to state that in a polite 'begging' letter to them. Shall I just not bother?

 

I've read stories on here, particularly about one motorist who was fined £40 on Morrisons car park, and his response to it was incredible.

 

Of course, I imagine that doing this probably takes balls of steel, and a good knowledge of consumer rights and the law. Credit where it's due though!:grin:

 

Well, thanks again for your advice. The information on this site is priceless!:)

[swisstoni]

Hi again Matt,

 

I have written to them asking to contact the driver, as I am the registered keeper however, If they take me to court, which I indeed hope they do, they have made several errors in retrospect of the issue of the ticket and can therefore not be enforced, not that it could anyway but I want the "day out" in court and i'll hit them for all my expenses, given the job i do, taking a day off loses me a significant amount of money and I shall recoup this. It's not about balls of steel, it's about knowing what's fair and what's downright grossly extortionate.

 

Plus going back to what you said about the car park, yes it is indeed interesting that they have added the leaving site rule on a little piece of yellow sticky tape. I was thinking of doing the same and adding "all cars of my make and colour and registration number are allowed to park here without prejudice". Same thing as they've done really. Who's to say when that was added? Was it before or after our supposed tickets? It would be awfully funny!!

 

If you need any help or advice Matt, contact me and i'll do my best to point you in the right direction.

 

SwissT

[Filthy Monkey]

Guys, I really wouldn't worry about this. I now have 57 tickets outstanding from Central Ticketing. You see, they 'manage' parking in the development where I live, so, despite paying £15,000 for each of the three parking spaces I bought, and despite the fact that I park the same cars in the same spaces most nights, they still stick a 'ticket' on my windscreen if I ever forget to attach my permit. The trouble is, the concierge only issues one permit per space, so if my cleaner needs to park I have to give her my permit and I almost always forget to stick it back in my car!

I get constantly bombarded by demands from them, but obviously I never pay, so eventually i start receiving more rubbish from their 'debt collection agency' threatening all sorts. However, it never goes any further, although I'd be delighted to take it to court, if it ever got that far...

[Guest 1594matt]

Guys, I really wouldn't worry about this. I now have 57 tickets outstanding from Central Ticketing.

 

:o Wow! And here's me losing sleep over ONE!! Ha ha! :grin:

 

Nice going!

[JetSetWilly]

Hi Matt,

 

Yeah, it was the one in Bury. Seems that they are really keen - obviously the 'parking warden' is on a promise of a plasma telly or laptop if he reaches target!

 

My 'parking charge' was issued to me within about 4 mins of me getting out of the car!

 

I received my 'parking charge' around about 2 weeks ago so no doubt will be receiving a 'polite reminder' (their words not mine). Will post when i get it!

 

Such a shame that comet & halfords have lost my custom. my families custom and absolutley everyone i ever speak to - forever!

 

Will be writing Comet & Halfords a letter about these vultures, see what they have to say.

 

all the best with yours mate and thanks to everyone for their support - really appreciate it

[JetSetWilly]

Hi again guys,

 

Just received a 'formal demand before court action' letter from Central Ticketing. It certainly doesn't look like a 'polite reminder'! More like a threatening letter! Seems now that they are happy to refer to the 'parking charge' as an unpaid 'parking ticket' hmmm...

 

I am just gearing myself up to send them a reply.

 

Just a couple of things, should I make it a major part of the letter that the date of the alleged parking violation is 3 years out of date on the ticket and contact the driver who owned it then or should i go down the track of it being unlawful and am not paying, full stop?

 

any help greatly appreciated

 

Regards

Wil

[swisstoni]

Just a couple of things, should I make it a major part of the letter that the date of the alleged parking violation is 3 years out of date on the ticket and contact the driver who owned it then or should i go down the track of it being unlawful and am not paying, full stop?

I would write to them again stating that if they want to take you to court, they should proceed down that route as you have evidence to the contrary otherwise their persistance to contact you over a "non-enforcable" penalty fine will be regarded as harassment and will be dealt with through the appropriate channels. The only correspondence you want in return from them and/or their subsidiaries is confirmation the penalty has been annulled.

 

SwissT

[swisstoni]

Hi Guys,

this is the signage on the car park of my "alleged" offence

 

 

Is this legal that they can just add a sticky bit of plastic at the bottom with added prohibitions on??

 

SwissT

[Zamzara]

Is this legal that they can just add a sticky bit of plastic at the bottom with added prohibitions on??

 

SwissT

 

In principle yes, as long as they added it before you parked, but since the new condition contradicts the conditions above it then I can't see how any of it is meaningful.

 

Also, a charge for contravening a condition is clearly a penalty even though they are avoiding using the word.

[patdavies]

Oh, love it:D:D

 

No person need ever pay a penny to these clowns.

 

 

1) A parking charge will be issued to vehicles

 

A vehicle is not sentient and cannot be pursued for debt, The sign should read "to the driver or person in charge of a vehicle"

 

2) Parking in a disabled bay without clearly displaying a disabled badge

 

Council issued disabled (blue) badges have no validity in a private car park. Likewise disabled bay markings (except by contract). Even so, they do not specify a blue badge - anybody could make up their own disabled badge and use a bay marked for disabled use with impunity.

 

To really split hairs, as there is no such thing as a disabled bay within private parking, they should better define what they mean by this term.

 

3) Contractual agreement

 

There is no time limit within the purported contract for paying them the parking charge. There is a limited time discount. If you had one of thier tickets, you could simply write to them to say that you agree to the charge of £85 as per the contract and as they have not made time of the essence, you will pay it on (say) 1st March 2050. If it is maintained that you have entered into their contract, then there is no provision stated within that contract to either add interest or attempt to enforce before the date that you give them.

 

Lastly, there is no mention that they will make application to the DVLA for details of the RK - this is a requirement of the DVLA (although, admittedly, more honoured in the breach...)

[Guest perky88]

You will find the DVLA notification requirment is on the actual charge for remedies of non-payment - this is all that is required for DVLA compliance (ie. if you dont pay within xdays, we will write to dvla to get your details).

 

No court would allow a charge to be paid in 2050, this would go against the charge and what it was designed to do .. 3-6 months would be reasonable to pay the amount ... 30years ... pushing it...

 

The disabled bit, private land owners can designate certain area of their land for disabled parking, in fact the DDA activly encourages it (or any other specified type) - here they are trying to protect the disabled area and ask that people put proof of their badge - the landowner by erecting the signs has also stated by the wording that if you decide to park in a bay then the charge will apply.

 

I would say the above sign is enforceable, the only downfall is the max 2hrs except shopping .. you could easily return to your vehicle after 5hrs buy a can of coke and charge not valid ... this is a very badly worded condition.

 

The next question could be - "what constitutes a customer" - you were looking for an item, overstayed the 2hrs whilst looking but then because they didnt have the scecific item you were looking for didnt purchase - but you intended to be a customer when visiting..

[patdavies]

You will find the DVLA notification requirment is on the actual charge for remedies of non-payment - this is all that is required for DVLA compliance (ie. if you dont pay within xdays, we will write to dvla to get your details).

 

Accepted

 

No court would allow a charge to be paid in 2050, this would go against the charge and what it was designed to do .. 3-6 months would be reasonable to pay the amount ... 30years ... pushing it...

The date was plucked out of the air - the relevant point being that there is no calendar time limit for payment; consequently, none is enforcible

 

The disabled bit, private land owners can designate certain area of their land for disabled parking, in fact the DDA activly encourages it (or any other specified type) - here they are trying to protect the disabled area and ask that people put proof of their badge - the landowner by erecting the signs has also stated by the wording that if you decide to park in a bay then the charge will apply.

But since the sign lack any specifics, you can make up your own disabled badge and according to their they will not ticket you...huh?

 

I would say the above sign is enforceable, the only downfall is the max 2hrs except shopping .. you could easily return to your vehicle after 5hrs buy a can of coke and charge not valid ... this is a very badly worded condition.

I would say that it is not enforcible - it cannot be enforcible.

 

The only test for such a sign is whether it can be relied upon to form the basis for an implied contract with the driver.

 

I would say that it may do, but any contract formed is so full of loopholes as to be a nullity

[Guest 1594matt]

My 'polite reminder' never arrived...?

 

Instead, I got a very threatening letter from these vultures, just this morning.

 

FORMAL DEMAND BEFORE COURT ACTION

AMOUNT NOW DUE - £85.00 WITHIN 14 DAYS

 

So nice...

 

 

I like how they add insult to injury by adding a £1.50 surcharge onto all card payments! Oh, it beggars belief how these people are still in business.

[Guest perky88]

1594matt ..

 

This is their "polite reminder" ... I know this as I have one myself sitting on my desk from a friend from Feb 2007, long story ....

 

I am sure it says at the bottom "This demand will form part of the case against you " !!!!

 

In essence a response was sent that was leaglly admissible on 8th March 2007 and no reply or silly threats from 'so called official' debt collectors received.

 

It was NOT the response people on here avise writing, as each case if unique and a standard approcach cannot be used - but in essence the ticket was never even issued as we have CCTV to show it as the ticket date/time actually corresponded with a crime occuring (unrelated) and no warden or other person even entered the carpark in the whole 6hrs of tape recordings - as this was reviewed for the police for the other incident.

[Rob S]

It was NOT the response people on here avise writing, as each case if unique and a standard approcach cannot be used - but in essence the ticket was never even issued as we have CCTV to show it as the ticket date/time actually corresponded with a crime occuring (unrelated) and no warden or other person even entered the carpark in the whole 6hrs of tape recordings - as this was reviewed for the police for the other incident.

 

So what was the response you used Perky?

[Guest perky88]

in essence the ticket was never even issued as we have CCTV to show it as the ticket date/time actually corresponded with a crime occuring (unrelated) and no warden or other person even entered the carpark in the whole 6hrs of tape recordings - as this was reviewed for the police for the other incident.

 

In response to your question RobS ... Take a wild guess .. the response is so simple, I thought even you would have got it !!!

[Rob S]

Why don't you answer the question Perky? That would be the simple way to do it.

[Guest perky88]

I thought I did .. TO MAKE IT CLEAR !!

 

" the ticket was never even issued as we have CCTV to show it as the ticket date/time actually corresponded with a crime occuring (unrelated) and no warden or other person even entered the carpark in the whole 6hrs of tape recordings "

 

Clearer now ??? surely this is a windup

[Rob S]

No, you posted a quote from a previous post with the comment "take a wild guess". That's hardly making it clear. There wasn't any need for you to be obtuse in the first place.

[Guest perky88]

Well .. armed with the facts that the ticket was never actually issued with proof of it .. I am hardly going to start stating "invoice the driver", "I was in Glasgow" or other rubbish am I ???

 

As I have always said, the best way of defence is not to be a smart arse and send them silly 5-page letters which come straight from a website .. but if you have a genuine argument .. then go with that !!

 

I thought I had made it clear .. Apologies, next time I will try and make it simpler for people to understand.

[JetSetWilly]

Hi All,

 

Not sure if the thread is still open but here goes.....

 

Further to my previous postings, I wrote a letter following the template I was kindly given which basically equated to; 'I did not own the vehicle on the date that is written on the parking( the attendant had written the dat as 3 years earlier!), contact the driver on that day and do not contact me again etc

 

I recieved a letter back from them telling me that it was the owner who was liable for the 'offence' (strange, it seems I have committed an offence now!) and that unless i could prove i wasn't the owner then i must pay up.

 

A month passes and this morning a letter arrives from the friendly fellas at 'Commercial Collection Services'. Anyone heard of them or had dealings with them?

 

The letter goes on to say that if i do not pay £135 by 12 noon on tuesday 23rd October 2007, they are authorised to prepare documents for the issue of count court proceedings against me. Then they add on the usual scare tactics of credit reference etc

 

What would you advise my next step to be? Am certainly not even remotely interested in paying! But should I write back or sit tight?

 

Any help would be greatly appreciated.