Free Traffic Legal Advice

Live cases legal advice => Private parking tickets => Topic started by: Dannyboy71 on May 20, 2025, 04:13:28 pm

Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: Dannyboy71 on January 12, 2026, 03:40:51 pm
Thank you!
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: jfollows on January 12, 2026, 03:35:40 pm
Hello, thanks.

Just checked the N180 and is a copy of the claimants!

Should I download a copy from the link below and complete or do you advise that i wait for further instruction from teh court ?

All the best, D
File your own N180 when MCOL tells you, or when you receive yours in the post, as above.
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: Dannyboy71 on January 12, 2026, 03:30:47 pm
Hello, thanks.

Just checked the N180 and is a copy of the claimants!

Should I download a copy from the link below and complete or do you advise that i wait for further instruction from teh court ?

All the best, D
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: jfollows on January 12, 2026, 03:23:19 pm
Search the forum for
N180

The forum is full of instructions on how to deal with the N180:
You will have to submit your own in due course.

You will also have a mandatory mediation session in due course, search the forum for
mediation
in due course.
You don’t settle at any point, including at the mediation session.

Quote
Having received your own N180 (make sure it is not simply a copy of the claimants N180), do not use the paper form. Ignore all the other forms that came with it. you can discard those. Download your own here and fill it in on your computer. You sign it by simply typing your full name in the signature box.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/673341e779e9143625613543/N180_1124.pdf

Here are the answers to some of the less obvious questions:

• The name of the court is "Civil National Business Centre".

• To be completed by "Your full name" and you are the "Defendant".

• C1: "YES"

• D1: "NO". Reason: "I wish to question the Claimant about their evidence at a hearing in person and to expose omissions and any misleading or incorrect evidence or assertions.
Given the Claimant is a firm who complete cut & paste parking case paperwork for a living, having this case heard solely on papers would appear to put the Claimant at an unfair advantage, especially as they would no doubt prefer the Defendant not to have the opportunity to expose the issues in the Claimants template submissions or speak as the only true witness to events in question.."

• F1: Whichever is your nearest county court. Use this to find it: https://www.find-court-tribunal.service.gov.uk/search-option

• F3: "1".

• Sign the form by simply typing your full name for the signature.

When you have completed the form, attach it to a single email addressed to both dq.cnbc@justice.gov.uk and info@dcblegal.co.uk (or whoever it is) and CC in yourself. Make sure that the claim number is in the subject field of the email.
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: Dannyboy71 on January 12, 2026, 09:37:31 am
Morning, just received a N180 email today, (see below) they are asking if i need to settle out of court ?

Good Morning
Having reviewed the content of your defence, we write to inform you that our client intends to proceed with the claim.
In due course, the Court will direct both parties to each file a directions questionnaire. In preparation for that, please find attached a copy of the Claimant's, which we confirm has been filed with the Court.
Without Prejudice to the above, in order to assist the Court in achieving its overriding objective, our client may be prepared to settle this case - in the event you wish to discuss settlement, please call us on within 7 days and make immediate reference to this correspondence.
If you have provided an email address within your Defence, we intend to use it for service of documents (usually in PDF format) hereon in pursuant to PD 6A (4.1)(2)(c). Please advise whether there are any limitations to this (for example, the format in which documents are to be sent and the maximum size of attachments that may be received). Unless you advise otherwise, we will assume not.
 
Kind Regards,
Litigation Support
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: Dannyboy71 on December 17, 2025, 03:16:30 pm
Thank you, I followed the advice and submitted a defence on MCOL. What do I now, just wait ? What do i need to look out for please. Thanks so much for all teh advice on this matter.
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: b789 on December 17, 2025, 11:51:44 am
With an issue date of 12th December, you have until 4pm on Wednesday 31st December to submit your defence. If you submit an Acknowledgement of Service (AoS) before then, you would then have until 4pm on wednesday 14th January to submit your defence.

You only need to submit an AoS if you need extra time to prepare your defence. If you want to submit an AoS then follow the instructions in this linked PDF:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xvqu3bask5m0zir/money-claim-online-How-to-Acknowledge.pdf?dl=0

Until very recently, we never advised using the MCOL to submit a defence. However, due to recent systemic failures within the CNBC, we feel that it is safer to now submit a short defence using MCOL as it is instantly submitted and entered into the "system". Whilst it will deny the use of some formatting or inclusion of transcripts etc. these can always be included with the Witness Statement (WS) later, if it ever progresses that far.

You will need to copy and paste it into the defence text box on MCOL. It has been checked to make sure that it will fit into the 122 lines limit.

Quote
1. The Defendant denies the claim in its entirety. The Defendant asserts that there is no liability to the Claimant and that no debt is owed. The claim is without merit and does not adequately disclose any comprehensible cause of action.

2. There is a lack of precise detail in the Particulars of Claim (PoC) in respect of the factual and legal allegations made against the Defendant such that the PoC do not adequately comply with CPR 16.4.

3. The Defendant is unable to plead properly to the PoC because:

(a) The contract referred to is not detailed or attached to the PoC in accordance with PD 16, para 7.3(1);

(b) The PoC do not state the exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions of the contract (or contracts) which is/are relied on;

(c) The PoC do not adequately set out the reason (or reasons) why the claimant asserts the defendant has breached the contract (or contracts);

(d) The PoC do not state with sufficient particularity exactly where the breach occurred, the exact time when the breach occurred and how long it is alleged that the vehicle was parked before the parking charge was allegedly incurred;

(e) The PoC do not state precisely how the sum claimed is calculated, including the basis for any statutory interest, damages, or other charges;

(f) The PoC do not state what proportion of the claim is the parking charge and what proportion is damages;

(g) The PoC do not provide clarity on whether the Defendant is sued as the driver or the keeper of the vehicle, as the claimant cannot plead alternative causes of action without specificity.

4. The Defendant submits that courts have previously struck out materially similar claims of their own initiative for failure to adequately comply with CPR 16.4, particularly where the Particulars of Claim failed to specify the contractual terms relied upon or explain the alleged breach with sufficient clarity.

5. In comparable cases involving modest sums, judges have found that requiring further case management steps would be disproportionate and contrary to the overriding objective. Accordingly, strike-out was deemed appropriate. The Defendant submits that the same reasoning applies in this case and invites the court to adopt a similar approach by striking out the claim due to the Claimant’s failure to adequately comply with CPR 16.4, rather than permitting an amendment. The Defendant proposes that the following Order be made:

Draft Order:

Of the Court's own initiative and upon reading the particulars of claim and the defence.

AND the court being of the view that the particulars of claim do not adequately comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a) because: (a) they do not set out the exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions of the contract which is (or are) relied on; and (b) they do not adequately set out the reason (or reasons) why the claimant asserts that the defendant was in breach of contract.

AND the claimant could have complied with CPR 16.4(1)(a) had it served separate detailed particulars of claim, as it could have done pursuant to PD 7C, para 5.2, but chose not to do so.

AND upon the Court determining, having regard to the overriding objective (CPR 1.1), that it would be disproportionate to direct further pleadings or to allot any further share of the Court’s resources to this claim (for example by ordering further particulars of claim and a further defence, with consequent case management).

ORDER:

1. The claim is struck out.

2. Permission to either party to apply to set aside, vary or stay this order by application on notice, which must be filed at this Court not more than 7 days after service of this order, failing which no such application may be made.
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: jfollows on December 17, 2025, 11:02:26 am
You are advised to redact the claim number and/or the password.
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: Dannyboy71 on December 17, 2025, 10:55:39 am


thank you, hopefully this is it, appreciate the support
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: b789 on December 17, 2025, 10:41:51 am
The ONLY page that I need to see is the actual N1SDT Claim Form. That’s the page with the name of the Claimant, their Legsl representative (if they’re using one) and the Particulars of Claim. It will have the claim number and, very importantly, the issue date on the top left.

What you have shown is the cover letter and the Acknowledgement of Service (AoS) form. If you show us the N1SDT form, I will give you the advice on how to respond. You will not be using any of the forms that came with the claim. Everything is done on line.
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: Dannyboy71 on December 17, 2025, 09:19:49 am


thank you, Yes i am that gullible person and panicked when i received the letter. I've gone onto IMGBB and uploaded the letters  and looking again at your advice believe it to be the claim form. Thank you

https://ibb.co/vxHLvkMv (https://ibb.co/vxHLvkMv)

https://ibb.co/N0XcyFd (https://ibb.co/N0XcyFd)
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: b789 on December 17, 2025, 01:20:41 am
OP, of you are calling an N1SDT Claim Form a CCJ, then you obviously have no clue about the process and are low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree ripe for the picking by these unregulated firms.

I suggest you try and follow the advice and show us this supposed “CCJ” you think you have received. If it is a CCJ, you have missed several vital steps in to the process. If it is just an N1SDT Claim Form, get your act together and either follow the instructions for showing the “CCJ” or whatever it is.

Just to assist you in trying to understand what you may have actually received, have a read of this article:

Quote
These unregulated private parking firms and their pet debt collectors thrive on one thing: the public’s ignorance of how County Court claims and CCJs actually work. They know that if they can make you believe that “a claim” or a “debt recovery” letter somehow wrecks your credit rating, you will panic and pay them. The gullible tree is full of low-hanging fruit, and they make a very good living shaking it.

Here is the reality, which you should read and take a “life lesson” from...

A Parking Charge Notice (PCN) from a private firm is not a fine. It is just a speculative invoice for an alleged breach of contract by the driver. At that stage, nothing touches your credit file.

If you are not successful in appealing the PCN – and appeals are almost never successful at the initial stage and rarely at the secondary, supposedly “independent” (but not) appeal – most low-hanging fruit do not understand that those decisions are not binding on them and they should never just pay. Many do, however, because they are ignorant of the process and fearful of imaginary consequences.

If you then get “debt recovery” letters from so-called debt collectors, those are just more speculative invoices dressed up in scary language designed to prey on your ignorance and fear. Debt collectors have no legal powers whatsoever to come to your door, take goods, or report anything to credit reference agencies. You could receive fifty of those letters and your credit rating would be unchanged.

As part of the modus operandi of these unregulated firms, the next formal step is usually a Letter of Claim (LoC). That is just a threat that they may start a County Court claim. Even then, your credit record is still untouched. It is simply a threat of legal action, not the result of it. Just more attempts to intimidate the low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree into paying out of ignorance and fear.

Only if they go ahead and issue a County Court claim do you enter the court (judicial) process. A Claim Form comes from the court, not from a useless and powerless debt collector. Getting a claim issued against you does not, by itself, affect your credit rating. A claim is simply an allegation that you owe money. You have the right to defend it. As long as you read your post, acknowledge the claim in time, and either defend it or settle it, your credit file remains untouched.

A County Court Judgment (CCJ) only arises if the court actually makes a judgment against you. That happens either because you defended and were unsuccessful at a hearing, or because you ignored the claim and the parking firm got judgment in default. Even then, you still have a crucial safety net that the low-hanging fruit do not realise exists. If you pay the full judgment sum within 30 days of the date of judgment, the CCJ is not registered on your credit file. It is expunged completely from the record. It is as if it never happened as far as lenders are concerned.

A CCJ only appears on your credit record if you fail to pay within that 30-day window. That is the point at which it gets recorded and can affect your ability to obtain credit. Up to that point, no amount of tickets, no stack of debt recovery letters, no Letter of/Before Claim, and not even the issuing of a County Court claim has any impact on your credit history.

Bailiffs are a separate step again. They cannot simply be sent because you have ignored an unregulated private parking invoice or a useless debt recovery letter. Bailiffs (enforcement agents) only become relevant after there is a CCJ and it has not been paid.

For most smaller PCN CCJs, it is not even worth the creditor’s time and cost to instruct bailiffs, especially when the amount is under £600 and stuck in the slower County Court enforcement system. But the key point is this: no unpaid CCJ, no lawful bailiff.

So when people say things like “I had a debt recovery letter so I might not get a mortgage now” or “if I defend, I will get a CCJ,” they are simply wrong. It is precisely that ignorance and fear that these firms trade on. They rely on ordinary motorists incorrectly assuming that a red-letter demand automatically means ruined credit and bailiffs at the door.

There is nothing in the advice given here that will affect your credit record. On the contrary, proper advice is what keeps you away from CCJs. If you engage with the process, defend where appropriate, and, in the extremely rare instance where you are unsuccessful defending a claim, pay any judgment within 30 days, your credit file will remain completely unaffected and no bailiff will lawfully darken your doorstep over a private parking charge.

These companies rely on being able to intimidate the low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree into paying out of ignorance and fear.
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: mickR on December 16, 2025, 07:30:53 pm
im guessing hes received a count court claim not a ccj but unfortunately im not mystic meg.
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: DWMB2 on December 16, 2025, 06:24:14 pm
Which you have done, and now we're asking to see what you have received, which the links jfollows has sent tell you how to do.

We asked you to come back when you received a claim form, so I hope you haven't received a CCJ...
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: Dannyboy71 on December 16, 2025, 04:39:07 pm
Oh Ok, i have read the link but this is in response to an ongoing issue, that has been going on for several months so not really sure what i'm supposed to do next now that I've received teh CCJ and was advised to come back once teh CCJ was received
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: jfollows on December 16, 2025, 03:30:24 pm
It’s in https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/ which you’ve been pointed to already,
specifically https://www.ftla.uk/announcements/posting-images/#new
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: Dannyboy71 on December 16, 2025, 03:15:32 pm
I'm not sure how i can attach teh letter  :-\
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: DWMB2 on December 16, 2025, 12:56:40 pm
We cannot advise on correspondence we haven't seen - please show us a copy.
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: Dannyboy71 on December 16, 2025, 12:56:04 pm
Afternoon,

Just received a CCJ notification today with an increased cost. Not sure what i should do now, any advice would be much appreciated, thank you
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: b789 on November 07, 2025, 01:16:54 pm
Just send it.
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: Dannyboy71 on November 07, 2025, 09:33:38 am
thanks, they did submit a blurred pic of the signage, a pic of my car and my appeal letter when i didn't receive the NtK, but that was all, does the email above still stand. Really appreciate the support,. I still feel CPM is so unfair. Thanks, again
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: b789 on November 06, 2025, 04:07:12 pm
Standard boilerplate response. I suggest you respond with the following:

Quote
Subject: Non-Compliance with the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims

Dear Sirs,

I note your latest correspondence. Your response remains non-compliant with the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims and the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct, as it fails to supply the key documents requested that are necessary for informed engagement — namely, the landowner authority, contemporaneous signage evidence, and the contractual terms alleged to have been breached.

Your refusal to provide these documents despite a specific and justified request constitutes a clear breach of paragraphs 3.1(a)–(d) and 6(a)/(c) of the Practice Direction. Should your client nevertheless issue proceedings, this correspondence will be placed before the court. I will invite the court to consider your conduct when deciding on case management and costs, in accordance with paragraph 15(b) of the Practice Direction and CPR 27.14(2)(g).

Furthermore, continued disregard of the Protocol obligations will warrant a formal report to the Solicitors Regulation Authority for failure to uphold the principles of integrity, independence, and proper standard of service.

Unless and until your client complies with its pre-action disclosure duties, I am unable to provide a further substantive response.

Yours faithfully,

[Your name]
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: Dannyboy71 on November 06, 2025, 09:18:17 am
Morning, just received teh below from DCB Legal Ltd, again should i just continue to wait for a court date

Subject: Our ref: / UK Parking Control Limited V
 
We write in response to your recent correspondence in response to our Letter of Claim (LOC) and will now respond as follows.

It is our position that the Letter of Claim (“LOC”) is compliant with the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (“the Protocol”). The LOC provides adequate information for you to identify the debt that our Client is seeking to recover. We would respectfully draw your attention to paragraph 2.1(c) of the Protocol and remind you that both parties are expected to act reasonably and proportionately.

For the avoidance of doubt, please note that the timeframe in which to appeal the Parking Charge has expired. You were given the opportunity to lodge an appeal when the initial Notice was issued to you. Given that the case has been escalated to this firm for recovery action, the time to appeal has now elapsed and payment of the Parking Charge(s) is now required.

The amount owed is a genuine pre-estimate of the losses incurred in managing the parking location to ensure compliance with the clearly displayed terms and conditions. Further, in accordance with the British Parking Association (BPA)/International Parking Community (IPC) Code of Practice, where the Parking Charge becomes overdue and before Court proceedings have commenced, a reasonable sum may be added for the debt recovery fees. The correct recovery fees have been added and will not be removed, for completeness we would advise that the fee is not inclusive of any VAT, as it does not pertain to a supply of goods/services between you and our Client.

To clarify, when parking on private land, the contractual terms of the site are set out on the signs. You are thus entering into a contract (by way of conduct) and agreeing to the terms by parking and staying on the site. Parking in breach of the terms as stipulated on the signage means that you are then breaking the terms of the contract.

Attached are copies of evidence pertaining to the matter, however, if there are any documents that you have requested, but that are not attached, it is because we have deemed the request to be disproportionate and/or not relevant to the substantive issues in dispute. We respectfully draw your attention to paragraph 2.1(c) of the Protocol and remind you that both parties are expected to act reasonably and proportionately.
You now have 30 days from the date of this email to make payment of the amount as per our Letter of Claim. Failure to make payment will result in a Claim being issued against you without any further reference.
Payment can be made via bank transfer to our designated client account: -
•   Account Name: DCB Legal Ltd Client Account
•   Sort Code:
•   Account Number:

You must quote the correct case reference () when making payment. If you do not, we may be unable to correctly allocate the payment. If further action is taken by us as a result of an incorrect reference being quoted, you will be liable for any further fees or costs incurred..
Alternatively, you can contact DCB Legal Ltd on  to make payment over the telephone or online at https://dcblegal.co.uk/response/pay-online/.
Please note that in the absence of payment in the next 30 days, our position remains as previously advised. As such, should our client instruct us to proceed with further legal action, we reserve the right to do so without any further reference to you.
If you are at all unsure of your legal position, we recommend that you seek your own independent legal advice
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: Dannyboy71 on September 30, 2025, 03:00:30 pm
Thank you  :)
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: b789 on September 30, 2025, 02:43:37 pm
You never, EVER fill out any forms sent by these firms. If you are referring to a Letter of Claim (LoC) then respond by email to invoice@dcblegal.co.uk and CC yourself as follows:

Quote
Subject: Response to your Letter of Claim Ref: [reference number]

Dear Sirs,

Your Letter Before Claim contains insufficient detail of the claim and fails to provide copies of the evidence your client places reliance upon, putting it in clear breach of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims.

As a supposed firm of solicitors, one would expect you to comply with paragraphs 3.1(a)–(d), 5.1 and 5.2 of the Protocol, and paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction. These provisions exist to facilitate informed discussion and proportionate resolution. You may wish to reacquaint yourselves with them.

The Civil Procedure Rules 1998, Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols (Part 3), require the exchange of sufficient information to understand each other’s position. Part 6 clarifies that this includes disclosure of key documents relevant to the issues in dispute.

Your template letter refers to a “contract” yet encloses none. That omission undermines the only foundation upon which your client’s claim allegedly rests. It is not possible to engage in meaningful pre-litigation dialogue while you decline to furnish the very document you purport to enforce.

I confirm that, once I am in receipt of a Letter Before Claim that complies with para 3.1(a), I shall seek advice and submit a formal response within 30 days, as required. Accordingly, please provide:

1. A copy of the original Notice to Keeper (NtK) and any notice chain relied upon to assert PoFA 2012 liability.

2. A copy of the contract you allege exists between your client and the driver, being an actual photograph of the sign(s) in place on the material date (not a stock image), together with a site plan showing the sign locations.

3. The precise wording of the clause(s) allegedly breached.

4. The written agreement between your client and the landowner evidencing standing/authority to enforce and to litigate.

5. A breakdown of the sums claimed, identifying whether the principal sum is claimed as consideration or damages, and whether the £70 “debt recovery” add-on includes VAT.


I am entitled to this information under paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction, and I require it to meet my own obligation under paragraph 6(b).

If you fail to provide the above, I will treat that as non-compliance with the PAPDC and Pre-Action Conduct and will raise a formal complaint to the SRA regarding your conduct. I reserve the right to place this correspondence before the Court and to seek appropriate sanctions and costs (including, where appropriate, a stay and/or other case management orders).

Until your client complies and provides the requested material, I am unable to respond properly to the alleged claim or to consider my position. It would be premature and a waste of costs and court time to issue proceedings. Should you do so, I will seek immediate case management relief pursuant to paragraph 15(b) of the Practice Direction and an order compelling provision of the above.

Please note, I will not engage with any web portal; I will only respond by email or post.

Yours faithfully,

[Your name]
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: jfollows on September 30, 2025, 11:40:01 am
https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/ for help with posting attachments
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: Dannyboy71 on September 30, 2025, 11:38:25 am
Hi  I've just received the attached letter from DCB Legal Ltd asking that i complete a reply form or financial statement and not sure what i should do now, obviously worried :-( Thanks for teh support
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: Dannyboy71 on July 29, 2025, 08:54:22 am
Thank you and will do. the advice is much appreciated
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: b789 on July 28, 2025, 05:22:32 pm
What a shameful fob-off by the DVLA. They simply rake in over £100,000 a day from these rogue operators and shirk any responsibility for the chaos these rogue operators create using that data.

You can search for other recent DVLA complaints and see how to raise it with the ICA.

As for GCTT or ZZPS, you can just ignore those useless debt collectors. They cannot do anything as they are powerless. The "warning of transfer to a solicitor" is just waffle. Only UKPC can instruct a solicitor to make a claim. They will use DCB Legal who will eventually discontinue late in the process if you are not low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree that pays up out of ignorance and fear.

When you receive a Letter of Claim (LoC) come back and we will advise on how to proceed. No one who follows the advice here pays a penny to UKPC.
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: Dannyboy71 on July 28, 2025, 03:13:13 pm
and teh DVLA one - i've also had a letter from an enforcement company GCTT stating that it is a warning notice of transfer to a solicitor

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: Dannyboy71 on July 28, 2025, 03:08:49 pm
Hi just had a response to DVLA and UKPC both unhelpful , please se attached.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: b789 on July 10, 2025, 04:32:05 pm
I also suggest you escalate this to the DVLA data sharing team at datasharing@dvla.gov.uk. Just make sure you reference the ongoing Step 2 complaint reference number in it. You can upload copies of the Notices, the complaint to UKPC and their responses as your evidence.

Quote
Subject: Formal Escalation – UKPC Misuse of Keeper Data and KADOE Breach

Dear DVLA Data Sharing Team,

I am writing to escalate a serious concern regarding UK Parking Control Ltd (UKPC) and their handling of my personal data obtained via DVLA’s KADOE access.

UKPC has misused my data in a manner that breaches both the KADOE contract and UK GDPR principles. I never received the original Notice to Keeper. I submitted a formal complaint to UKPC requesting cancellation or reissue of the NtK. They failed to respond. Instead, they issued a “reminder” notice and later escalated the charge through a debt recovery notice.

These two notices claim entirely different contraventions:

• The Reminder Notice refers to Beckton Triangle Retail Park, 5 Claps Gate Lane, London E6 6LG, on 22/03/2025 at 12:30:30.
• The Debt Recovery Notice refers to Bell Green Retail Park, Sydenham, SE26 4PU, on 06/02/2025 at 10:43:24.
• Yet both notices use the exact same evidential photograph.

This is either evidence of fabricated or duplicated evidence or serious data mismanagement. UKPC’s explanation — that it was a "system error" — is not acceptable. They have used DVLA data to pursue a charge based on wholly inaccurate and inconsistent information. That is a breach of the KADOE contract and is not “using the data only for the specified purpose.” It also breaches Articles 5(1)(b) and 5(1)(d) of the UK GDPR.

I consider this unlawful processing and have also submitted a formal complaint to the BPA. A copy of this matter has been sent to the DVLA Complaints Team via Step 2.

I now ask that the Data Sharing Team investigate whether this breach warrants suspension or termination of UKPC’s KADOE access. Their behaviour demonstrates that they are either corrupt, incompetent, or both – and entirely unfit to be entrusted with DVLA data.

Please confirm receipt and let me know the outcome of any investigation.

Yours faithfully,

[Your Full Name]
[Your Vehicle Registration Number]
[PCN Number]
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: b789 on July 10, 2025, 04:21:24 pm
Respond to UKPC with the following:

Quote
Subject: Re: Formal Complaint – Misuse of DVLA Data and Instruction to Cancel PCN: [PCN number]

Dear Complaints Department,

Your response is entirely unsatisfactory and fails to address the seriousness of the misconduct.

You admit that the debt recovery notice contained a false location, date, and time due to what you now describe as a “system error.” That is not a trivial administrative mistake. You sent a threatening demand for payment based on details that were completely incompatible with the earlier letter, yet both referenced the same image. This is either:

• evidence of fabricated evidence and duplicity,
• a sign of total operational breakdown,
• or both.

It is a breach of UK GDPR to rely on inaccurate data, and a breach of the KADOE contract to use DVLA-supplied keeper data in support of such misleading notices. Your obligations under the Code of Practice and data protection law do not vanish simply because you have passed the matter to a third-party debt collector.

You also completely ignored my original formal complaint about the non-receipt of the original NtK, thereby depriving me of any chance to appeal. You cannot now hide behind process exhaustion or "ZZPS control" when your own failures created this mess.

To be clear:

• You have misused personal data obtained from the DVLA
• You have issued contradictory documents referring to different contraventions using the same photograph
• You failed to respond to a valid complaint in good time
• You escalated the matter despite the unresolved dispute

I will not be contacting ZZPS, as they are not a lawful party in this matter. The charge remains in dispute and UKPC is still the data controller responsible for this misuse. If you persist in escalating or processing my data via debt collectors, it will be treated as harassment and unlawful processing.

This matter is now the subject of formal complaints to both the DVLA and BPA. I fully expect both bodies to consider enforcement action. You are once again instructed to cancel this charge immediately.

Yours faithfully,

[Your name]

You can also escalate your complaint to the BPA with the following:

Quote
Second Follow-Up – Formal Complaint Against UKPC (Submitted 13 June 2025)

Dear BPA Complaints Team,

This is now my second follow-up regarding the formal complaint I submitted to you on 13 June 2025 concerning UK Parking Control Ltd (UKPC, a member of your Approved Operator Scheme. It is completely unacceptable that I have received no acknowledgement or response from the BPA, especially given the seriousness of the breaches outlined.

To reiterate:

• UKPC failed to respond to my formal complaint about never receiving the original Notice to Keeper. I was denied any opportunity to appeal, in direct breach of the Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP).
• UKPC then issued a debt recovery notice referring to a completely different location, date, and time than the Reminder NtK, but using the exact same evidential photograph.
• Reminder NtK: Beckton Triangle Retail Park, E6 6LG – 22/03/2025 at 12:30:30
• Debt Recovery: Bell Green Retail Park, SE26 4PU – 06/02/2025 at 10:43:24

This is either outright fabrication or a catastrophic systems failure — in either case, it amounts to unlawful processing of keeper data and proves UKPC is unfit to hold DVLA KADOE access. Their conduct is not only a breach of the PPSCoP and UK GDPR, but also of basic procedural integrity. Their eventual response, dismissing this as a “system error” and referring me to a debt collector, only compounds the misconduct.

The complaint was submitted to you in line with your own escalation procedure, after UKPC failed to respond. It has now been four weeks without a reply from the BPA. I find this delay completely unacceptable and contrary to your stated role as a pseudo-regulator.

I expect immediate confirmation of receipt and a full investigation into UKPC’s conduct. Failure to act on this complaint would amount to complicity in misconduct by an AOS member.

Yours faithfully,

[Your Name]
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: Dannyboy71 on July 10, 2025, 02:35:59 pm
Received a response about the DVLA complaint. Unhelpful as you can imagine.
Thanks for supporting me with this issue.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: Dannyboy71 on June 30, 2025, 04:17:47 pm
Thank you, that's much appreciated :) 
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: b789 on June 30, 2025, 04:13:49 pm
I refer you to this comment from an earlier post:

@Dannyboy71

You can safely ignore any and all debt recovery letters. Debt collectors are powerless to do anything, no matter how threatening their letters may seem. All they can do is try and persuade the low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree to pay up out of ignorance and fear.

Never, ever enter into any communication with a peerless debt collector. Ignore them.

Regarding the DVLA fob-off reply, you can now escalate to Step 2. This step is identical to Step 1 except that the link is nw to "Head of Complaints" at https://contact.dvla.gov.uk/complaints

Here is the content for the Webform and Supporting Statement that you will upload:

Quote
I am escalating my original Step 1 complaint about UK Parking Control Ltd (UKPC), a BPA AOS member with KADOE access. The response I received was wholly inadequate and failed to address the substance of my complaint.

The DVLA’s reply admits that UKPC sent false information in a debt recovery notice due to a “bug” in their system. That is not a defence — it is an admission of breach. More seriously, the false letter refers to a completely different location, date and time than the previous notice, while using the exact same evidential photograph. This cannot be explained away by a template error. It indicates either fabricated evidence or systemic data mishandling.

The DVLA has tried to dismiss this by claiming affected motorists would have received “three prior letters with the correct details.” I clearly stated in my original complaint that I never received an original Notice to Keeper, and this point was ignored.

UKPC used my DVLA-supplied data to send contradictory and misleading notices and then ignored my formal complaint. That is a clear breach of the KADOE contract, the PPSCoP, and UK GDPR. The DVLA’s role as data controller does not end once data is disclosed — and the suggestion that oversight rests entirely with the BPA is unacceptable.

I have submitted a formal complaint to the BPA, but this does not absolve the DVLA of responsibility for unlawful or negligent data use after disclosure. The agency is still failing to act as required under the UK GDPR and must refer this matter to the ICO.

I have attached an updated supporting statement and request confirmation of a reference number for this Step 2 complaint.

And here is the Supporting Statement that should be uploaded as a PDF:

Quote
SUPPORTING STATEMENT

Complaint to DVLA – Breach of KADOE Contract and PPSCoP

Vehicle registration: [insert VRM]
Original complaint submitted: 16 June 2025
Step 1 response received: [insert date of DVLA response]

This is a Step 2 escalation of my original complaint regarding UK Parking Control Ltd (UKPC), a BPA AOS member with DVLA KADOE access.

The DVLA’s Step 1 response was inadequate and failed to address the actual breach. The response admits that UKPC issued a debt recovery notice containing false information, attributing this to a “bug” in their system affecting one letter template. However, the letter I received:

• Referred to a completely different location,
• Stated a different date and time, and
• Used the exact same photograph as the previous notice.

Specifically:

• The Reminder NtK referred to an alleged contravention at Beckton Triangle Retail Park, 5 Claps Gate Lane, London E6 6LG on 22/03/2025 at 12:30:30.
• The debt recovery notice referred to Bell Green Retail Park, Bell Green, Sydenham SE26 4PU on 06/02/2025 at 10:43:24.
• Both used the same evidential image.

This is not a trivial “template bug.” It is either a case of data fabrication or serious evidence mishandling. UKPC has no excuse for continuing to pursue motorists using false details based on DVLA data. Their conduct is either corrupt or utterly incompetent.

The DVLA’s claim that “three prior letters” would have contained the correct details is factually wrong. I clearly stated in my original complaint that I never received the original Notice to Keeper. That point was ignored.

The entire basis of KADOE access is that data is used accurately, fairly, and for a single, specific incident. UKPC has issued multiple contradictory notices based on the same DVLA data. That is a breach of:

• The KADOE contract (clauses B2 and C2.1),
• The Private Parking Single Code of Practice (accuracy, escalation, complaint handling), and
• UK GDPR Articles 5(1)(b) and 5(1)(d).

The DVLA is the data controller and remains responsible for ensuring personal data is not misused after disclosure. The Step 1 response simply deflects this responsibility onto the BPA, which is unacceptable. I have submitted a formal complaint to the BPA, but the DVLA cannot outsource its data controller obligations.

I request that the DVLA:

• Acknowledge the actual substance of the breach,
• Reopen its investigation,
• Impose sanctions or restrictions on UKPC’s KADOE access if appropriate, and
• Report this matter to the ICO under the agency’s obligations as data controller.

This is a clear example of how ongoing misuse of DVLA data by an AOS member can occur under DVLA’s watch, and it must not be ignored.

Name: [INSERT YOUR NAME]
Date: [INSERT DATE]
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: Dannyboy71 on June 30, 2025, 03:46:21 pm
Hello, Had a response from DVLA and a new letter from a new debt recovery organisation. I've uploaded both letters.
do you think I need to sit tight and wait for a summons. Someone mentioned a statutory declarations but not sure if this would apply?
again any advice/suggestions would be much appreciated.
all the best, Danny

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: b789 on June 13, 2025, 12:00:22 pm
You raise a formal complaint to the BPA by completing this form: https://portal.britishparking.co.uk/compliance/LogComplaint

• For "Operator complaint outcome" just put: "No response to formal complaint"
• Operator name: "UK Parking Control Ltd"
• Date parking charge notice issued: 22/03/2025
• Car park name and address: "Take your pick: Beckton Triangle, E6 6LG or Bell Green, SE26 4PU"
• Details of the complaint:

Quote
I am submitting a formal complaint regarding UK Parking Control Ltd (UKPC), a member of your Approved Operator Scheme. UKPC has failed to respond to a formal complaint, thereby exhausting their complaints procedure and enabling escalation under BPA rules.

The initial complaint was submitted after I received a Reminder Notice to Keeper dated 23/04/2025. This was the first correspondence I received. I never received an original Notice to Keeper, meaning I was denied any opportunity to appeal. My formal complaint to UKPC requested either cancellation of the charge or reissue of the NtK. UKPC did not respond at all.

Worse still, UKPC has since issued a debt recovery notice that refers to a completely different contravention. It alleges a different location, a different date, and a different time — yet both notices use the exact same evidential photograph. The Reminder NtK refers to an alleged incident at Beckton Triangle Retail Park, 5 Claps Gate Lane, London E6 6LG on 22/03/2025 at 12:30:30. The debt recovery notice refers to Bell Green Retail Park, Bell Green, Sydenham, SE26 4PU on 06/02/2025 at 10:43:24. Both letters use the same image.

This is either a clear case of fabricated or duplicated evidence or an alarming example of complete data management failure. It demonstrates that UKPC is unfit to hold DVLA KADOE access and is misusing keeper data. Their failure to respond to a formal complaint and subsequent escalation based on irreconcilable details is a breach of the Private Parking Single Code of Practice and basic procedural fairness.

A formal complaint has already been submitted to the DVLA, who remain the data controller. I expect the BPA to also take action. UKPC’s conduct in this matter is indefensible. They are either utterly incompetent, corrupt, or both — and I expect this to be treated as a serious regulatory failure. Appropriate sanctions should follow.

Please confirm receipt and let me know the outcome of your investigation.

You should upload both notices and also a copy of the original complaint that was never responded to.
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: b789 on June 13, 2025, 11:32:20 am
Why on earth would you consider paying a scammer when we've already told you that if you follow our advice, you won't be paying penny to UKPC.

Did you send the formal complaint letter as advised? Have you had a response to that?

As they have used the same evidential photo for the two notices, one a reminder and one a debt recovery notice, you first need to make a formal complaint to the DVLA. Here’s how to make a DVLA complaint:

• Go to: https://contact.dvla.gov.uk/complaints
• Select: “Making a complaint or compliment about the Vehicles service you have received”
• Enter your personal details, contact details, and vehicle details
• Use the text box to summarise your complaint or insert a covering note
• You will then be able to upload a file (up to 19.5 MB) — this can be your full complaint or supporting evidence
That’s it.

The DVLA is required to record, investigate and respond to every complaint about a private parking company. If everyone who encounters a breach took the time to submit a complaint, we might finally see the DVLA take meaningful action—whether that means curtailing or removing KADOE access altogether.

For the text part of the complaint the webform could use the following:

Quote
I am submitting a formal complaint against UK Parking Control Ltd (UKPC), a BPA AOS member with DVLA KADOE access, for misusing my personal data following its release.

UKPC has misused my DVLA keeper data. Without issuing a Notice to Keeper (NtK) they sent me two letters—first a Reminder Notice to Keeper dated 23/04/2025, then a Final Debt Recovery Notice dated 05/06/2025—both claiming to relate to the same alleged contravention, but quoting completely different details, yet using the exact same evidential photo.

The Reminder states the location as Beckton Triangle Retail Park, 5 Claps Gate Lane, London E6 6LG on 22/03/2025 at 12:30:30.

The debt recovery letter states the location as Bell Green Retail Park, Bell Green, Sydenham SE26 4PU on 06/02/2025 at 10:43:24.

Both letters use the exact same photographic evidence. This proves they have either fabricated the contravention details or are reusing the same DVLA data to pursue two fundamentally contradictory events. I did not receive the original Notice to Keeper. I submitted a formal complaint to UKPC asking them to cancel or reissue the NtK. They ignored it entirely and escalated the matter instead, which is also breach of the BPA/IPC Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP).

This conduct shows either corruption, gross incompetence or a combination of both, and UKPC is clearly unfit to hold KADOE access. The DVLA must investigate, sanction UKPC, and if this turns out to be systemic, report its own regulatory failure to the ICO.

I have attached a supporting statement and copies of both letters. Please confirm a reference number.

Then you could upload the following as a PDF file for the formal complaint itself:

Quote
SUPPORTING STATEMENT

Complaint to DVLA – Breach of KADOE Contract and PPSCoP

Operator name: UK Parking Control Ltd (UKPC)
Date of PCN issue: Unknown – only a Reminder NtK was received on 23/04/2025
Vehicle registration: [INSERT VRM]

I am submitting this complaint to report a misuse of my personal data by UKPC, who obtained my keeper details from the DVLA under the KADOE (Keeper At Date Of Event) contract.

Although the parking company may have had reasonable cause to request my data initially, the way they have used that data afterwards amounts to unlawful processing. This is because they have acted in breach of the BPA/IPC Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP), which is a mandatory requirement for access to DVLA keeper data. The PPSCoP forms part of the framework that regulates how parking companies must behave once they have received keeper data from the DVLA.

The KADOE contract makes clear that keeper data may only be used to pursue an unpaid parking charge in line with the Code of Practice. If a parking company fails to comply with the PPSCoP after receiving DVLA data, their use of that data becomes unlawful, as they are no longer using it for a permitted purpose.

UKPC has issued two notices purporting to relate to the same contravention, using the same photographic evidence, but the details are completely different.

The first notice, a Reminder Notice to Keeper dated 23/04/2025, claims the alleged incident occurred at Beckton Triangle Retail Park, 5 Claps Gate Lane, London E6 6LG on 22/03/2025 at 12:30:30.

The second notice, a Final Debt Recovery Notice dated 05/06/2025, claims the alleged incident occurred at Bell Green Retail Park, Bell Green, Sydenham SE26 4PU on 06/02/2025 at 10:43:24.

Despite the differences in location, date and time, both letters include the exact same evidential photograph of my vehicle. This means UKPC has either fabricated one of the alleged contraventions or is using the same evidence to support two different claims. Either way, it shows they are pursuing incompatible claims using my DVLA data.

I never received the original Notice to Keeper (NtK). I lodged a formal written complaint to UKPC, demanding that they cancel the charge or reissue the NtK so I could appeal. UKPC ignored my complaint entirely and, instead, escalated the matter by issuing a debt-recovery notice that quoted a different site, date and time while re-using the same photograph.

Such conduct can only be explained by outright corruption, gross incompetence, or a combination of both. Either way, UKPC falls nowhere near the standard expected of any operator trusted with live KADOE access to DVLA data.

This behaviour breaches the Private Parking Single Code of Practice, which requires accurate notices, proper complaint handling and fair escalation. It also breaches the KADOE contract because my keeper data has been used in a manner that is inaccurate, misleading and wholly outside the “reasonable cause” for which it was supplied. The same facts put UKPC in breach of UK GDPR Articles 5(1)(b) and 5(1)(d).

I expect the DVLA to investigate immediately, confirm the breach and impose meaningful sanctions. UKPC’s KADOE access should be suspended or terminated. If the DVLA allows this to continue it is failing in its own duties as data controller and must account for that to the ICO.

I have attached both letters as evidence. Please confirm receipt and provide a reference number for this complaint.

Name: [insert full name]
Date: [insert today’s date]

You also send the following to UKPC in an email to complaints@ukparkingcontrol.com and you also CC in yourself:

Quote
Subject: Formal Complaint – Misuse of DVLA Data and Instruction to Cancel PCN: [PCN number]

Dear Sirs,

This is a follow-up to my previous formal complaint sent on [date you sent original email], which you failed to respond to. I never received the original Notice to Keeper(NtK), only a reminder notice dated 23/04/2025, and I raised this with you in writing, requesting either cancellation of the charge or reissue of the original NtK so I could appeal. You ignored the complaint entirely.

You have now issued a debt recovery notice dated 05/06/2025, that not only escalates the charge unfairly, but also refers to a completely different location, date and time than your earlier notice. Both letters use the exact same photographic evidence. This proves you are either fabricating contravention details or reusing the same image to support conflicting claims. That alone invalidates your entire case.

This conduct is either outright corruption, complete incompetence, or both. You are misusing my personal data and clearly acting outside the terms of the KADOE contract. You are also in breach of the BPA/IPC Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP) and the UK GDPR. Your behaviour falls well short of the standards expected of any operator with access to DVLA data.

I have now reported this matter to the DVLA and asked them to investigate and consider suspension or termination of your KADOE access. A formal complaint has also been submitted to the BPA. While I do not expect much from your tame ATA, I will be pressing for full sanctions.

You are hereby instructed to cancel this Parking Charge Notice immediately. If you do so, it will not undo your breach, but it may be regarded as a first step toward mitigating your liability in this matter.

If you fail to cancel the charge or continue to escalate it, I will treat it as deliberate harassment and unlawful processing of my personal data.

Yours faithfully,

[Your Full Name]
[Your Address]
[Vehicle Registration]
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: jfollows on June 13, 2025, 09:59:49 am
The large red font is obviously working!

Seriously, wait for advice here before panicking and paying.
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: Dannyboy71 on June 13, 2025, 09:53:52 am
Received the  below email and the attached letter

also on teh attached letter it now has different location and different date. Should i just pay it cause I'm getting concerned

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: Dannyboy71 on May 22, 2025, 09:13:17 am
thats great - thank you :-)
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: b789 on May 22, 2025, 12:40:25 am
You should email the following formal complaint to UKPC at complaints@ukparkingcontrol.com and also CC yourself:

Quote
Subject: Formal Complaint – Failure to Serve Notice to Keeper / Disability Considerations

Parking Charge Reference: [Insert Reference]
Date of Alleged Contravention: 22/03/2025
Location: Beckton Triangle Retail Park, 5 Claps Gate Lane, London, E6 6LG

Dear UK Parking Control Ltd,

I am writing a formal complaint regarding the above parking charge. I am the registered keeper of the vehicle. I was only made aware of this charge when I received a letter dated 23/04/2025 demanding £170. Prior to that date, I did not receive a Notice to Keeper (NtK) by post.

Had I received a NtK, I would have appealed it promptly. The charge has now been arbitrarily increased to £170, despite the fact that no opportunity has been given to make representations. This is both procedurally unfair and contrary to the expectations set out in the Private Parking Single Code of Practice, specifically:

Section 8.1.2(e) – Note 2:

“A notice sent by post is to be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, to have been delivered on the second working day after the day on which it is posted... Therefore, parking operators must retain a record of the date of posting of a notice, not simply of that notice having been generated (e.g. the date that any third-party Mail Consolidator actually put it in the postal system).”

Accordingly, you are put to strict proof that the original NtK was posted in accordance with the above standard, including evidence of the actual date of posting (not just generation), such as a Royal Mail manifest or proof from your mail handler.

The driver is disabled and a valid Blue Badge holder. The vehicle was parked in a disabled bay, albeit slightly outside the bay lines due to the adjacent vehicle encroaching into the space at the time of parking. This was necessary to allow safe access due to their disability and did not cause any obstruction to other vehicles. This context should have been taken into account when assessing the circumstances.

Resolution Sought

I therefore request that UKPC:

1. Cancel the parking charge, taking into account your obligations under the Equality Act 2010 and the clear lack of proper notice;
OR
2. Re-issue the Notice to Keeper, restarting the process and granting the Keeper the opportunity to appeal properly.

I also request that any escalation or further enforcement action be placed on hold pending the resolution of this complaint.

Failure to respond substantively will result in a formal complaint to the DVLA, the British Parking Association (BPA) and may be brought to the attention of the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) if there is evidence that personal data has been mishandled or letters were sent to the wrong address.

Yours faithfully,

[Your Full Name]
[Your Address]
[Email if applicable]
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: Dannyboy71 on May 21, 2025, 09:01:44 am
Thank you, that's very much appreciated, like I said I did not receive the first two only the third telling me that I now owe £170 and that it is now going to a debt collector.

I've attached the fine letter as requested, any support/guidance would be gratefully received   

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: b789 on May 20, 2025, 07:26:19 pm
@Dannyboy71, welcome to the forum. Please stop panicking over this. If you follow the advice you won't be paying a penny to these scammers.

Before we proceed with the necessary advice, please tell us whether the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) you received was a windscreen Notice to Driver (NtD) or a postal Notice to Keeper (NtK)? Which unregulated private parking company has issued this PCN?

As for the previous posters question about the address on your V5C is because it is often the case that when someone changes address, they update their drivers licence details with the DVLA but are unaware or forget to update their V5C address separately. The parking operator will only send the PCN to the address on the V5C but a debt recovery company will do a simple credit reference check to obtain a current address, which is why the first you know about this PCN is when you receive the debt recovery letter.

You can safely ignore any and all debt recovery letters. Debt collectors are powerless to do anything, no matter how threatening their letters may seem. All they can do is try and persuade the low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree to pay up out of ignorance and fear.

Never, ever enter into any communication with a peerless debt collector. Ignore them.

For now, wended to see the PCN you received. Only redact your personal info and the PCN reference number. Leave everything else visible, especially all dates and times. We also need to know what you wrote to the parking company. This is important because you may have made some mistakes by contacting them before receiving advice. However, that does not mean that it is fatal to your case.

Invariably, if you follow our advice, these cases will reach litigation but will eventually be struck out or discontinued.
Title: Re: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: Dannyboy71 on May 20, 2025, 04:24:08 pm
Yes for both
Title: Re: Not received the private parking charge
Post by: jfollows on May 20, 2025, 04:22:52 pm
Are you the registered keeper of the car and, if so, is the address on the V5C for the car correct?
Title: Debt Collectors due to not receiving the private parking charge - disabled driver
Post by: Dannyboy71 on May 20, 2025, 04:13:28 pm
I am a disabled driver with a blue badge and was issued a ticket on 22/03/2025. The ticker was because I was not parked within the DISABLED bay markings. The reason was when I arrived another car was overlapped, and I needed to park this way in order to get my disability out of the car. I was NOT parked across a different bay and was not obstructing another vehicle. However, the issue is that I never received a ticket on my windscreen or by post.

The first time I was aware of this ticket was on the 23/04/2025 when I received a letter demanding £170. If I would have received the original ticket I would have appealed straight away. There was no way to contact UKPC by phone so had to write a complaint letter. I received a response today stating that 2 letter were posted but I did not receive. Was told that my case is now with a debt recovery agency so the cost will now increase.

I am disabled and have no way of paying this and feels very unfair that I have not received any letters until the letter dated 23/04/2025

Really not sure what I should do now. >:(

[attachment deleted by admin]