-
Show us the N1SDT Claim Form when you receive it. Redact your persona info, the claim number and the MCOL password. Leave everything else, especially all dates and times visible.
-
Typical of this firm of incompetent wannabe legals. The first thing is I report them to HMRC for suspected VAT fraud (in the £millions).
You can now either respond and repeat the questions they have not answered an darn them that their refusal to answer them is a breach of the PAP and will be used against them at any hearing, or you can just sit back and wait for for the N1SDT Claim Form to arrive from the CNCB.
the claim will contain Particulars of Claim (PoC) that fail to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a) which is a serious breach of procedure and a defence with supporting persuasive case law will be made for the claim to be struck out for this breach.
You are thankfully dealing with a firm whose incompetence is embarrassing.
I guess their "Please note, we will not accept any further submissions from you." comment means we just wait for their court papers to arrive. Thanks for your time and help on this matter.
-
He I am, some 5 years since last sticking my nose into the seedy world PPCs, and one name that continues to astonish me as to their presence is Gladstones. Given the volumes of these invoices printed, someone, some where, must see that this is a huge abuse of process and the practice should be outlawed.
PS. The new board is a vast improvement on Pepipoo (RIP)
-
Typical of this firm of incompetent wannabe legals. The first thing is I report them to HMRC for suspected VAT fraud (in the £millions).
You can now either respond and repeat the questions they have not answered an darn them that their refusal to answer them is a breach of the PAP and will be used against them at any hearing, or you can just sit back and wait for for the N1SDT Claim Form to arrive from the CNCB.
the claim will contain Particulars of Claim (PoC) that fail to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a) which is a serious breach of procedure and a defence with supporting persuasive case law will be made for the claim to be struck out for this breach.
You are thankfully dealing with a firm whose incompetence is embarrassing.
-
Hi this case seems to be progressing along. I sent Gladstones the letter as advised and this was their reply in October which was basically irrelevant, just confirming they only had one address for our contact.
VIA EMAIL ONLY
Our Reference:
30th October 2024
Dear Mrs
Request for Erasure of Personal Data
We write in response to your request for Erasure of Data, specifically relating to erasing any older address than the address shown below.
For completeness, our Firm hold only the below address for you;
Therefore, the request for Erasure is not applicable in these circumstances.
Other Queries
Please note the remainder of your correspondence will be addressed by the Legal Department in due course, please be assured that the matter will remain on hold until then.
Yours sincerely
The Compliance Department
Gladstones Solicitors Limited
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
Today we received a new email from Gladstones stating the following. We are now looking for advice on how to tackle this...........................
10 number deleted.10 / 31 / Premier Parking Enforcement Ltd -v- deleted
Dear Mrs ,
We write further to your correspondence dated the 26th Oct er 2024.
May we take the opportunity to thank you for your patience whilst awaiting a response.
The Amount Due/ Debt includes £70.00 claimed by our Client for the time/resources spent facilitating the recovery of the unpaid parking charge notice(s) pursuant to its ATA’s Code of Practice and the Terms and Conditions of the Contract, which was entered into upon the driver of the vehicle entering the Relevant Land. The amount is a pre-determined and nominal contribution to our Client’s losses as a direct result of your non-payment.
As our Client is satisfied the charge was issued correctly, we invite you to make payment in full to the bank account detailed below, quoting reference 10.1.
Gladstones Solicitors Ltd
Barclays Bank
Account Number: 33028712
Sort Code: 20-24-09
The outstanding amount is £170.00.
Alternatively, you can make payment online at www.gladstonessolicitors.co.uk or via the automated payment line on 0333 0230 049 quoting your reference.
Failure to make payment before the 25th February 2025 will result in legal proceedings being issued to recover the debt in full.
Please note, we will not accept any further submissions from you.
Kind regards,
Skye
Legal Assistant
Gladstones Solicitors Limited
Unit B
1st Floor
210 Cygnet Court
Centre Park
Warrington
WA1 1PP
w : www.gladstonessolicitors.co.uk
t : 01565 755088
e : Skye@gladstonessolicitors.co.uk
I notice they avoided answering the questions posed to them in the letter dated 26/10/24 as drafted by yourselves, .... I notice they avoided answering the questions they were given re..... 1. Am I to understand that the additional £70 represents what you lot dress up as a 'Debt
Recovery' fee, and if so, is this nett or inclusive of VAT? If the latter, would you kindly explain
why I am being asked to pay the operator’s VAT?
2. With regard to the principal alleged PCN sum: Is this damages, or will it be pleaded as
consideration for parking? Can you advise on next move. Thank you for all your time and effort.
-
Ideally, you send the letter as a PDF attachment in an email. That address is a valid one for Gladstone.
-
I have copied, pasted and filled in the address. Sorry to bore you but should I send it to their contact email address enquiries@gladstonessolicitors.co.uk
thanks
-
You send it as a PDF attachment by email. There is no better proof of delivery than an email.
Signed for post is definitely not reliable. If the recipient refuses to sign for it, all you have is proof of non delivery.
If you insist on posting anything, use the free Certificate of Posting from any Post Office. The Interpretation Act 1978 covers the "proof of posting" for deemed service of a letter in the UK. Specifically, Section 7 of this Act addresses the concept of deemed service, stating that unless the contrary is proven, a letter properly addressed, prepaid, and posted is deemed to have been received in the ordinary course of post.
In practice, this means that if you can provide proof that a letter was posted (such as a certificate of posting from the post office), it is generally assumed to have been delivered unless the recipient can provide evidence to the contrary.
-
Thank you so much for all the help given to us in order to deal with this. Should I send this reply by recorded delivery or can it be done online.
-
Respond to the LoC with the following:
Dear Sirs,
Your Ref. 104320.10641
Gladstones Solicitors Ltd.
Claimant: Premier Parking Enforcement Enforcement Ltd
I refer to your your letter of claim.
I confirm that my address for service for the time being - assuming you don't delay any claim - is as follows, and any older address that you may have must be erased from your records:
[MY ADDRESS]
The alleged debt is disputed and any court proceedings will be vigorously defended.
I note that the amount being claimed has increased by a hugely exaggerated amount which the Government called "extorting money from motorists" [Hansard]. Don't send me your usual mendacious waffle about that.
I have two questions, and under the PAP I am entitled to specific answers:
1. Am I to understand that the additional £70 represents what you lot dress up as a 'Debt Recovery' fee, and if so, is this nett or inclusive of VAT? If the latter, would you kindly explain why I am being asked to pay the operator’s VAT?
2. With regard to the principal alleged PCN sum: Is this damages, or will it be pleaded as consideration for parking?
I await your response.
Yours faithfully,
-
Hopefully these are now visible.
https://imgur.com/xcPkuUS
https://imgur.com/5FtM572
https://imgur.com/eqDRRZA
https://imgur.com/os9Dxe8
I did get a letter from dvla stating who had asked for our details. I thought I had put it up a while ago.
-
Can't see the letter. If you're not sure on how to post images, please read this:
READ THIS FIRST - Private Parking Charges Forum guide (https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/)
Did you send the complaint to the DVLA as advised?
-
This is the letter received from Gladstones. Your advice as usual will be much appreciated.
thank you
https://imgur.com/xcPkuUS
https://imgur.com/5FtM572
https://imgur.com/os9Dxe8
https://imgur.com/tNeYaE4
-
A Letter Before Claim should not be ignored. It means they are planning to instigate a claim in the County Court. It would be useful to see a copy of this.
-
Today we received letter from Gladstones solicitors with the capital letter routine LETTER BEFORE CLAIM Should we ignore this or is there another way of giving them aggravation.
thanks for your help with this
-
Thank you. I will definitely send an email to DVLA and I most definitely want to rattle ppl cage.
-
A complaint to the DVLA should be made because PPE are not the company that the alleged contract was with. If the signs at the location are in the name of PPL, why has a separate registered company requested the Keepers details from the DVLA. This is a blatant breach of the KADOE contract and the DVLA must be made aware of it and you must ask them what they intend to do about it.
A private company has requested your DVLA data. That company does not operate the car park. A different company operates the car park. Can any private company simply request your DVLA data without any contractual link to you?
As for the letter, ignore them. They have already been warned twice that passing your data to a third party debt collector will be considered a breach of your GDPR and will be dealt with should they fail to comply with your request.
If you want to rattle their cage, write to PPE and ask them on what basis they had a right to request your DVLA data when there is no contractual relationship. The contractual relationship is with PPL as it is their name on the signs in the car park. Mention that you are also reporting them to the DVLA for this breach of the KADOE contract.
-
DVLA reply to my letter. Premier Parking Enforcement Ltd applied for the driver details on 10/07/24. I also have two letters from Premier Parking Enforcement one claims to be a Parking Charge Notice and the newer one a reminder notice threatening debt recovery agent. Premier Parking Logistics not mentioned anywhere. Should I ignore the letters or reply. Thanks. I cannot access imgur to post pics, are there other similar sites.
-
Doesn’t matter. Anything with the persons name and address will do. It’s usually better if they have the V5C but it isn’t a big deal.
-
SAR request sent as attached pdf file. Do we go to IAS or leave it.
-
it is a private registration plate that belongs to the driver. Should I go ahead anyway.
-
Sorry to waste your time guys but just trying to fill in the sar and the driver tells me they do not have the log book as it is a motability vehicle. They have insurance documents. Can you tell me how do we proceed.
-
Prima facie, the legal issue is that the OP has not received a notice from the other party to the driver's contract. However, this unentitled person has offered the keeper the opportunity to plead their case with an independent assessor, so it makes sense to do so. If there are angles to this that the OP and we haven't seen then these would be aired at this time. Why should a keeper not take advantage of what on the face of it is a step in accordance with PoFA just because some people on a website are of the view that they're wasting their time?
There is nothing in statute which requires a creditor to immediately proceed to court, and there is nothing which enables a debtor to instruct a creditor on the methods they must follow, and given that this option is specified in the CoP, then it seems an obvious step for a legitimate creditor to take.
-
And where is the OP not “sticking to the legal issues and CoP”?
An appeal was made pointing out that the OP denied any debt and informed the operator that if they want to pursue the debt in court they should do so. The operator does not simply have “permission” to pass the keepers details to a third party DRA simply because their unregulated CoP says they can. Where on earth do you get the notion that they have some sort of statutory right do that?
They have been put on notice that the keeper is aware of their GDPR rights and that if they wish to pursue the alleged debt then they should take it to the ultimate dispute resolution service... court. If the operator decided to ignore the keepers GDPR rights then they are aware of the sanctions that the keeper has a right to take.
It really is a simple as that. If the operator chooses to pursue the alleged debt, they should respect the GDPR of the keeper and not pass their data to a third party that cannot change the ultimate outcome, should they be prepared to progress it that far.
I find it astonishing that someone can give weight to the actions of these companies as though they are respectable followers of the law. We all know their reputations and the underhand, vexatious and unreasonable behaviour they resort to.
For now, the OP has appealed and stated their position, especially with regard to the handling of their personal data. The keeper has pointed out the legal position of why the PCN is invalid. The operator has rejected the appeal which was exactly as expected and the normal modus operandi of these cowboys.
A second response, reminding them, in no uncertain terms, where the keeper stands on this and has invited them, if they are confident that a debt is owed, to proceed to the ultimate debt resolution service and to send a Letter of Claim and then file a claim where a judge will decide whether the debt is owed or not.
Now all the keeper has to do is wait and see what the operator does. The ball is in their court and waffling on about sticking to the legal issues is superfluous.
If the keeper wishes to put the effort into an IAS appeal, good luck but based on experience, I would place money on them being back here once that effort is rejected and they are waiting to see if the operator decides to pursue it further.
-
Agreed.
OP, stick to the legal issues and CoP.
-
As such, they have no authority to request your info from DVLA
This is why I suggested a SAR to DVLA. My assumption is that the company that is an approved operator are the ones who did this, but as their company is seemingly not offering contracts in their name on the site, it's difficult to see what reasonable cause they would have for accessing the OP's data in the first place, much less passing it on to a third party debt collector.
-
OP, I suggest you go back to the sign on site which set out the terms and conditions.
According to IPC, Premier Parking Logistics is not an Approved Operator, neither is Walton Watkins - see IPC website:
https://portal.theipc.info/aos-members/p/?page=2
As such, they have no authority to request your info from DVLA. Similarly, they are not able to access IAS nor IAS to consider.
PPE have no legal standing because they are not a party to the alleged contract.
Just stick to the facts of the sign, IPC Code of Practice etc. when you appeal to IAS. Less cage rattling for fun, just stick to the basics...
...IMO.
And if PPE were a party, then as they are an AO and they may institute debt recovery procedures pursuant to their CoP. You cannot tell them to naff off or take you to court..well you can tell them but this has as much legal force as a PCN from PPE ...
...IMO.
-
Thanks guys.
-
johnboy1967,
your VRM and e-mail address are visible in your last post!
-
Nothing unexpected there. We now wait and see what they decide to do. They can simply disappear into the woodwork and you never hear from them again or they pass you details to a DRA and they will have breached your GDPR which opens them up to a compensation claim or they initiate legal proceedings where they will get a spanking.
You are dealing with intellectually malnourished ex-clamper thugs. Don’t expect normal behaviour from them. Nothing to fear though and you will have the satisfaction that if they try to progress this further, it is going to cost them money.
-
This is all standard. They accept appeals through the methods stated on the notice, and will not engage in further correspondence outside of the appeal process. The purpose of the follow up email was just to show you're not backing down.
-
They replied to email. I find this astounding, they replied to my appeal through this email but now claim no reply will be made through this email. Full reply as follows...................
Attention Re: PCN: - VRM: [REMOVED] UNAUTHORISED PARKING
Yahoo
/
Inbox
Premier Parking Enforcement
From:
info@premierparkingenforcementltd.com
To:
[REMOVED]
Wed, 24 Jul at 15:57
Thank you for your email.
PLEASE NOTE:
THERE IS NO ONLINE PAYMENT SYSTEM. TO MAKE PAYMENT PLEASE CALL THE 24 HOUR PAYMENT LINE 01302 513249.
IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO MAKE PAYMENT BY PHONE YOU CAN SEND A CHEQUE/POSTAL ORDER (WITHIN TIMESCALES)
Appeals website is
https://ppeappeals.atriahub.co.uk/
appeals will not be answered on this email please use the website above.
If you are appealing/querying a parking charge notice or enquiring about any other business please remember to include ALL DETAILS as stated on the parking charge notice. If you do not forward the drivers FULL NAME AND FULL RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS details your appeal/enquiry will NOT be processed. Please specify if you are the driver of the vehicle. We will reply to appeals within 28 days if you do not receive a reply within 28 days please contact us as your appeal may not have been processed.
We are unable to answer further queries on rejected appeals.
Show original message
-
Message sent. Thank you all once again.
-
I will send this this morning with the greatest of pleasure. I will keep you all informed of any replies. Thank you.
-
Nothing unexpected. They were never going to uphold an appeal. However, you have gone through the motions and, as you have observed, they have not addressed the issues raised in your appeal.
I would suggest responding to their rejection with the following, for the record:
Re: Parking Charge Notice [PCN Number]
I acknowledge receipt of your rejection letter dated [insert date] regarding the above Parking Charge Notice (PCN). However, I note that your response has not addressed the specific points raised in my appeal.
Also, for the record and avoidance of any doubt, in my appeal I clearly stated:
1. I explicitly informed you that there must be no transfer of my personal details to any third-party debt recovery agents. This serves as a formal notice that I will not tolerate any harassment through DRA letters, which would constitute a breach of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and a breach of GDPR under the Data Protection Act 2018. Should there be any deviation from this path, I reserve the right to pursue a Part 20 counterclaim against your company for GDPR breach and any distress and inconvenience caused.
2. If you intend to pursue this alleged debt, which I categorically deny, you should issue a claim in the County Court. I am fully prepared to defend myself against any claim, and I will present my appeal, your rejection, and this letter in evidence.
You have now been warned and are on notice that any correspondence from any third-party that is not a solicitor acting on your behalf to issue a Letter of Claim or issue an N1SDT county court claim form will be considered a breach of my GDPR. Any evidence where you have provided my data to a third party debt recovery agent may also be used as evidence of unreasonable behaviour in any Part 20 counterclaim. Your company is now formally on notice regarding this matter.
While I do not expect any further response from you, you must understand that I am resolute in my stance. Should you wish to pursue this matter further, you are invited to do so through the proper legal channels.
-
I will keep you advised on progress.
-
Ha! That might be a world record for the quickest appeal rejection we've seen.
Essentially, unless you want to chance your arm with the kangaroo court that is the IAS*, it's a case of waiting to see if they try to sue. In the meantime, await the response to your DVLA subject access request too.
*part of me would be curious to see how they would deal with an appeal that raises the sole issue of the creditor being different to the one on the signage.
-
I have received an email from this company. I have removed names and reg but can put them in if needed, it reads as follows.... Any advice on how I proceed with this.
Thanks
PCN: 3 - VRM: Y UNAUTHORISED PARKING
Yahoo
/
Inbox
Premier Parking Enforcement
From:
info@premierparkingenforcementltd.com
To:
j
Tue, 23 Jul at 14:51
Thank you for the email,
I have read and investigated your particular appeal and unfortunately your claim has been unsuccessful for the following reasons:
Parking is for Patrons only while they are using the Pepes Premises, you failed to provide proof of purchase of using the shop and was seen walking past the premises.
You were issued with a parking charge notice for: UNAUTHORISED PARKING
this is private land and the terms and conditions state: PARKING IS PERMITTED FOR PATRONS ONLY WHILE THEY ARE USING THE PREMISES AND PARKED IN THE DESIGNATED BAY.
Please see Photographic Evidence at www.payppe.co.uk (This is not a link) of your vehicle failing to comply with the sites terms and conditions
If you believe this decision is incorrect you are entitled to appeal to the independent Appeal Service (IAS) in order to appeal,You will need you Reference number,your vehicle registration and the date the charge was originally issued.
Appeals must be submitted to the IAS within 21 date of the above date to be added to the site within 24 hours. Please visit www.theias.org for full details
Please note that should you wish to Appeal to the IAS the charge will be £100 if rejected.
To avoid further actions you will need to make a payment of £60
This is to be paid at the reduced rate within 14days,which needs to be paid within 14days of the above date
failing to pay in the required time will incur further costs.
Payment can be made on our 24 hour Telephone payment line 01302513249 or can be paid by cheque or postal order to the address at the bottom of the mail.
PLEASE NOTE YOUR APPEAL HAS BEEN REJECTED THEREFORE WE ARE UNABLE TO ANSWER ANY FURTHER CORRESPONDENCE ON THIS APPEAL.
Regards,
Premier Parking Enforcement Ltd
By accepting receipt of this information you agree to use this information in line with GDPR, the Data Protection Act 1998 and any other relevant legislation and guidelines. Privacy Policy at info@premierparkinglogistics.com/privacy-policy
Tel: 0121 236 1878
Email: info@premierparkinglogistics.com
Address:
Block 3, Mint Drive,
Hockley, Birmingham
B18 6EA
-
If you are trying not to out the driver your post 13 does just that.
It doesn't really matter in this case as the PoFA technical failure would never be accepted by the PPC nor the IAS.
-
If you are trying not to out the driver your post 13 does just that.
-
Done it. I had tried to email the address when in fact it was a webpage. All sent and notification received that they have got the appeal. Thank you all for your patience and effort. I will let you know the outcome
-
Ideally submit this online, via the website listed on the notice you've shared, linked above by b789
-
https://ppeappeals.atriahub.co.uk works for me. Just use the webform. Keep a copy of what you actually paste into the webform.
Or, email the pdf attachment to info@premierparkingenforcementltd.com
Or simply email the appeal as the body of the message.
Make sure you CC in yourself.
-
You just couldn't make this lot up, there is no viable email address on that page. Should I phone them to get the correct appeal address. ppeappeals.atriahub.co.uk I can imagine it could be ppeappeals@riahub.co.uk but is it done deliberately to prevent appeals.
https://imgur.com/a/qFZezQC
-
I will contact DVLA today. So which letter should I use to send appeal. The driver has asked me to say thank you all so much for all the help you have already provided.
I suggest you send the following text as the appeal from the keeper:
As the keeper of the vehicle, I decline to identify the driver. I deny that I owe any debt and challenge the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) [PCN Number] issued on [Date] at [Location], in which you allege that the driver is liable to pay a parking charge to you, Premier Parking Enforcement Ltd, as the creditor.
The signage at the car park clearly states that the creditor is Walton Wilkins trading as Premier Parking Logistics Ltd, not Premier Parking Enforcement Ltd. Since Premier Parking Enforcement Ltd has issued the PCN but is not the named creditor on the signage, you do not have the legal standing to enforce this charge.
Therefore, I suggest that the PCN be cancelled immediately. If Premier Parking Enforcement Ltd believes they have the authority to act on behalf of Premier Parking Logistics Ltd, I suggest that they provide evidence of this authority, such as a contract or agency agreement between the two companies.
Additionally, I require evidence of a contract flowing between the landowner and either Premier Parking Logistics Ltd or Premier Parking Enforcement Ltd. Neither company are stakeholders in the land, and without such a contract, there is no basis for either company to issue or enforce a PCN on this property.
I do not wish to engage in a secondary appeal through the Independent Appeals Service (IAS), as their reputation as a biased and non-independent body makes it a waste of time for all parties involved. Any offer of such an appeal will be disregarded.
Please take careful note, as this appeal will be used in evidence should this dispute ever reach court. If you refuse to cancel the PCN, there must be no passing or transfer of my details to a third-party debt recovery agent (DRA). Instead, you should issue a claim for the alleged debt in the County Court, where I will vigorously defend myself and you can expect a thorough examination by the judge.
Furthermore, any deviation from this requested path, including involving a third party for debt collection, will be considered harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and a breach of GDPR under the Data Protection Act 2018. Such actions may result in a Part 20 counterclaim against you for any distress and inconvenience caused by these breaches.
-
That's OK. As blue badges were mentioned, I just wanted to clarify in what context. This fact would be used as possible mitigation circumstances but is not really relevant to the way forward being proposed.
-
I will contact DVLA today. So which letter should I use to send appeal. The driver has asked me to say thank you all so much for all the help you have already provided.
-
The bays were not specifically marked for disabled.
-
You can even represent them and talk on their behalf as a lay representative, as is your right. The defendant would have to be present but you could do all the talking.
In the meantime, as suggested by @DWBM2, send a SAR to the DVLA using this form:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/62692f63d3bf7f0e7d5b3dc6/make-a-subject-access-request-to-dvla-form-mis1065_270422.pdf
It is fairly straight forward and can easily be done using a PDF editor. For the following question: "Tell us what specific information you need about your vehicles" you can put this:
I am seeking information on which companies have accessed my registered keeper data from your database.
I would like to receive a detailed record of all entities that have accessed my registered keeper data, including the dates of access and the reasons for which my data was requested.
This information is requested to ensure that my personal data is being processed appropriately and to verify that there are no improper activities concerning the handling of my information.
The completed form can be emailed as a PDF attachment to:
subjectaccess.requests@dvla.gov.uk
The response will be by post and can take a while to arrive. I tis not required to progress this case but will be useful information.
-
If it does go to court, your partner will be the defendant. You can assist, and possibly sit beside to offer quiet advice as a McKenzie Friend, but they would be required to attend if it went to a hearing.
-
OK. Thank you for the update. I don't think the blue badge issue will come into this, to be honest. Just for information, was the bay parked in marked as a bay for blue badge holders?
-
Thank you so much for this. The driver is the registered keeper and they are also registered blue badge disabled. I am more than happy to go with whatever advice you give us. I am writing only because the driver is not the sort of person who would be able to fight such abuse. I was so incensed by the way this sign was worded that I told the driver they must fight it. Whatever you all suggest we will take it and send it. I am more than willing to go to court to represent the keeper as I believe many people will have been scammed by this signage. Thank you all for all of this help.
-
As an aside to this, alongside the appeal it might be worth sending a Subject Access Request (https://ico.org.uk/for-the-public/getting-copies-of-your-information-subject-access-request/) to the DVLA for a record of which companies have accessed registered keeper data from their database, to see if there are similar shenanigans going on with the processing of the keeper's data.
(You'd be wise to attach proof of keeper status [i.e. a copy of your V5C] to said request - the response should arrive within a few weeks, and might take most of that time as last time I sent a SAR to DVLA the response was sent by post)
-
Once we know who is going to be the appellant, it could be worded even more strongly. Assuming the keeper will be responding as it is in their name that the invoice has been issued, I would go with the following:
As the keeper of the vehicle, I decline to identify the driver. I deny that I owe any debt and challenge the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) [PCN Number] issued on [Date] at [Location], in which you allege that the driver is liable to pay a parking charge to you, Premier Parking Enforcement Ltd, as the creditor.
The signage at the car park clearly states that the creditor is Walton Wilkins trading as Premier Parking Logistics Ltd, not Premier Parking Enforcement Ltd. Since Premier Parking Enforcement Ltd has issued the PCN but is not the named creditor on the signage, you do not have the legal standing to enforce this charge.
Therefore, I suggest that the PCN be cancelled immediately. If Premier Parking Enforcement Ltd believes they have the authority to act on behalf of Premier Parking Logistics Ltd, I suggest that they provide evidence of this authority, such as a contract or agency agreement between the two companies.
Additionally, I require evidence of a contract flowing between the landowner and either Premier Parking Logistics Ltd or Premier Parking Enforcement Ltd. Neither company are stakeholders in the land, and without such a contract, there is no basis for either company to issue or enforce a PCN on this property.
I do not wish to engage in a secondary appeal through the Independent Appeals Service (IAS), as their reputation as a biased and non-independent body makes it a waste of time for all parties involved. Any offer of such an appeal will be disregarded.
Please take careful note, as this appeal will be used in evidence should this dispute ever reach court. If you refuse to cancel the PCN, there must be no passing or transfer of my details to a third-party debt recovery agent (DRA). Instead, you should issue a claim for the alleged debt in the County Court, where I will vigorously defend myself and you can expect a thorough examination by the judge.
Furthermore, any deviation from this requested path, including involving a third party for debt collection, will be considered harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and a breach of GDPR under the Data Protection Act 2018. Such actions may result in a Part 20 counterclaim against you for any distress and inconvenience caused by these breaches.
-
It is also the case that PPL isn't a subsidiary of PPE (or vice versa). It cannot be. The director controls over 75% of the shares.
The use of "premises" rather than a business name or location is very common. (Though has clearly caused confusion).
-
Good spot b789 - this contract discrepancy might change my approach at this stage - I'd be tempted to focus solely on this for now:
Dear Sirs,
I have received your Parking Charge Notice (PCN Ref: _______) for vehicle registration mark _______, in which you allege that the driver is liable to pay a parking charge to you, Premier Parking Enforcement Ltd, as the creditor.
Having inspected the site of the alleged parking event, "Pepes Peri Peri 203 Stratford Road B90 2AH", it is not clear how any contract can have been formed between the driver and Premier Parking Enforcement Ltd, as there is no signage at the site bearing the name of Premier Parking Enforcement Ltd. The only signage to be found is from Premier Parking Logistics Ltd., an entirely different company registered separately with Companies House. As such, no contract can possibly exist between the driver and you, Premier Parking Enforcement, and therefore, no money is owed.
I look forward to your confirmation that the charge has been cancelled.
Yours,
I've written this on the fly so folks might suggest amendments.
-
Walton Wilkins is the only registered director of Premier Parking Enforcement Ltd (PPE) and Premier Parking Logistics Ltd. (PPL)
These are two separately registered companies. The “contract” is with PPL but the invoice is from PPE.
The trading addresses are also incorrect as shown on both the sign (the contract) and the invoice (the NtK/PCN). This would never get to court as they would face a spanking for these breaches of contract law and abuse of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (CRA).
As PPE have issued the invoice, the appeal, even though it will be rejected should let them know in no uncertain terms that the appellant is on to them and they should save everyone time by cancelling the PCN. It is too late for them to issue a new invoice that could hold the keeper liable and the evidence that they are trading illegally is already on the record.
I am happy to draft up a snarky appeal but others on here prefer a more sedate and serious approach to this stage.
The ultimate aim of my approach is to force them to produce a valid contract which they cannot, either at IAS stage or at claim stage where they would face a strike out after having actually cost them a bit of money to get to that stage.
-
This good. First we need to clarify in whose name is the PCN. It will have been sent to the registered keeper. The Notice to Keeper (NtK) is PoFA compliant except for a technicality but that is not likely to make any difference at appeal stage.
For now, the keeper and the driver are two separate entities. The driver is always liable but is unknown to the unregulated private parking company (PPC). The keeper is known. The PPC is relying on their following of all the requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) to be able to transfer the liability from the unknown driver to the known keeper.
The known keeper could also be the unknown driver. We and the PPC don't know. As it is not really going to be an issue going forward who, in your opinion is better able to deal with handling this? The keeper or the driver? Are you either of those entities or are you simply assisting one or both of them?
Once it has been decided who is best able to deal with this, we can move on. If the keeper is also the driver, there is nothing we need to do. If the driver is not the keeper but is better able to deal with it, the keeper needs to transfer the liability to the driver.
Once this de ion has been made we will move onto the next step.
Having already noticed that the “contract” is unenforceable, I have also noticed more anomalies. The signs say the creditor is Walton Wilkins (t/a Premier Park Logistics). The NtK states that the creditor is Premier Parking Enforcement Ltd. This is another arrow in the quiver that is likely to be useful if it ever goes as far as a court hearing.
What needs to be understood is that if this does go to court (highly unlikely in my opinion because it is likely to be struck out at allocation stage) the risk is that if you were unsuccessful in defending it, the total sum likely would be around a bit less than £200. There is no risk of a CCJ on the credit record as if it was paid within 30 days of judgment, it is simply expunged from the record. That is a worst case scenario and, in my opinion, highly unlikely, but you must be aware of this before taking the fight to these scammers.
-
Draft something up to show us first, but in my view the keeper, to whom the notice was addressed, should appeal, on the basis that they do not believe any unauthorised parking occurred.
I'd be tempted to draw attention to the fact that they have failed to specify what term they believe the driver to have breached, instead just saying "Unauthorised parking". I'd also be tempted to point out that whilst their notice specifies the location as "Pepe's", the signage on-site simply says "the premises", which, given the car park adjoins a row of connected buildings, is vague and creates the impression that parking is allowed for those visiting any of the businesses that form part of that row.
Any appeal will be rejected, but appealing shows the parking company you know your stuff.
-
I looked at this without any legal knowledge and I was instantly angered that no businesses are mentioned. The driver is elderly, their mother even more elderly and frail and had to attend the adjoining premises for hearing aids. I can assure you the driver will not back down and we will embrace your advice and take it all the way to court if you deem it necessary. I just need advice, I am no legal expert but my reaction was that no specific business is mentioned and thus the driver was a patron of a business and not liable for any offence. We have no worry taking this the distance as I sincerely feel the driver was abused in this instance. Please can you advise, do we ignore, reply with appeal or state they abused their position. Thanks for your help in this.
-
Appealing this is not going to make it go away. You are dealing with an entrapment. The PCN simply says unauthorised parking. The sign does not define which premises it refers to. There is ambiguity and the contract is not enforceable.
The only way this is ever going to be resolved is if it goes to court. That is a good thing as only a judge would be a truly independent arbiter.
The issue is if the keeper wants to fight this all the way. The process with an IPC member company is to simply ignore any appeals and try and scare their victim into paying into their scam. They will send debt collector letters in the hope that their victim is low-hanging fruition the gullible tree and will capitulate out of ignorance.
They may even go all the way and issue a county court claim for debt. This is winnable but will require the keeper to follow the advice. It may never get to a claim or even if it did, may not ever get to court.
The main thing to understand is that the keeper will have to have faith that the advice works. Is the keeper willing band able to do so?
-
The driver thought they were parking legally. The front of the shops is pedestrianised and they believed these bays were for shoppers using the facilities. The driver used their blue disabled badge and took the driver's also disabled mother to get her hearing aids, she used Scrivvens in 205 Stratford Road. the last picture shows the shops adjoined. 205 Stratford Road B90 3AH was recently opened as scrivvens and pepi at 203 Stratford Road was also opened on the day in question. There is no mention of any business on the parking notices, the driver also complied by ensuring the disabled blue badge was adequately displayed. Can she appeal this, all help gratefully accepted. I struggled to get these pictures up and hope they are adequate.
https://imgur.com/a/qFZezQC
https://imgur.com/a/qFZezQC
https://imgur.com/a/qFZezQC
https://imgur.com/a/qFZezQC
https://imgur.com/a/qFZezQC
-
Follow the link posted by Slapdash above, and provide as much of the information asked for as you are able to. The guide also advises on how to use Imgur to add images to your posts.
-
https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/
-
The driver has received a pcn while parked in a private land bay. They believed they wer parking correctly and was displaying their blue badge while taking an even more disabled member of family in to a shop to get their hearing aid. The driver believed parking was for the row of shops but apparently it was only for one shop and they used the one next door. The signage does not specify it is only for one shop and specifically mentions no business. The signage does say you have to be a patron and the driver firmly believed they were abiding to the rules. The parking was at 203 Stratford Road B90 3AH, the driver went in to Scrivvens 205 Stratford Road. I can put pictures up if you can tell me what site to host them or can I post direct. A previous case you advised on was a Tower Hamlets one that you said was invalid as pcn was invalid due to no date on NTK. They have just recently cancelled it after months of dispute. Your help will once again be much appreciated. Thank you.