Robbing Hood Airport parking charges

[Martyn1968]

Has anybody received one of these through the post after stopping on the road outside Doncaster Sheffield Robbing Hood Airport? If so who has paid the charge?

[Donnywolf]

Has anybody received one of these through the post after stopping on the road outside Doncaster Sheffield Robbing Hood Airport? If so who has paid the charge?

This is a Thread from 2013 which goes through the whole subject

http://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=238757.msg327279#msg327279

For the record I never answered any of the 8 letters I got and received the last one NINE months after the Car registered to me allegedly stopped

Hope this helps .... but also check Martin Lewis Site

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5192051&highlight=dsa+parking

[Filo]

Has anybody received one of these through the post after stopping on the road outside Doncaster Sheffield Robbing Hood Airport? If so who has paid the charge?

This is a Thread from 2013 which goes through the whole subject

http://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=238757.msg327279#msg327279

For the record I never answered any of the 8 letters I got and received the last one NINE months after the Car registered to me allegedly stopped

Hope this helps .... but also check Martin Lewis Site

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5192051&highlight=dsa+parking

As I told you at the time, it's about holding your nerve when they increase the threat level, they try and bully and frighten people into paying up

[auckleyflyer]

Its a private company who are nothing to do with the actual airport! They cant access roads were liable for. Council have the access rd and peel investments north, the north car park road and old estate. Feks us off their making money from the airport.
I always stop and warn people as do my colleagues.
We block their hiding point on the roundabout constantly. Its hardly a difficult site to access just park 5 min away???

[BobG]

Don't pay Martyn. It's legalised extortion this. I too have suffered from the attentions of this sort of thug - for parking at one of the services on the M4! They threatened and bullied and sent increasingly nasty letters for 2 or 3 months. Don't respond to ANY of them. Keep them, just in case, but don't respond. They'll give up in the end.

Cheers

BobG

PS Of course, as an example of free enterprise at work, I suspect our intellectually challenged poster will be all in favour.

[Martyn1968]

Thanks for your comments.

I received my Notice of Parking charge last week and after a few days pondering whether to pay or not I decided to appeal. I did use the flow chart and newbies thread, basically copy and pasted a template with my details. I'd expect a rejection letter but then I have to follow it up to the POI? this is where it supposedly gets dismissed. Here's the template that I sent.

Dear Sirs

Re: PCN No. *******

I challenge this 'PCN' as keeper of the car, on these main grounds:

a). The sum does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss, nor is it a core price term. It is a disguised penalty and not commercially justified.
b). As keeper I believe that the signs were not seen, the wording is ambiguous and the predominant purpose of your business model is intended to be a deterrent.
c). There is no evidence that you have any proprietary interest in the land.
d). Your 'Notice' fails to comply with the POFA 2012 and breaches various consumer contract/unfair terms Regulations.
e). There was no consideration nor acceptance flowing from both parties and any contract with myself, or the driver, is denied.

Your clients should be thoroughly ashamed of the shoddy way you treat consumers visiting their premises. The landowner will be made fully aware of this matter and your response, which I will forward to their CEO when I complain in writing and via social media, as appropriate. Parking firms like yours fail to demonstrate even a basic understanding of customer service. The reputation of your business model appears to be more akin to a protection racket than 'parking management'. Your ATA may offer sound-bites about driving up standards or fight for motorists' rights but in reality they are not a regulator; they merely exist to represent the interests of paying members, in order to gain access to DVLA data. The public have no faith in the private parking industry and, as far as I have seen, your firm has not shown itself to be any different than the ex-clampers with whom you share a membership.

The purpose of this communication is:

1. Formal challenge
There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. As such, you must either rely on the POFA 2012 or cancel the charge. I suggest you uphold this challenge now or alternatively, send a rejection letter - subject to accepting my claim for costs as clearly stated below, since you have no case.


2. ''Drop hands'' offer
The extravagant 'parking charge' is baseless but I realise that you may have incurred nominal postage costs. Equally, I have incurred costs to date, for researching the law and responding to your junk mail dressed up to impersonate a parking ticket. It is clear that my costs and yours, at this point, do not exceed £15. Therefore, this is a formal “drop hands” offer. I remind you of the duty to mitigate any loss, so withdraw the spurious charge within 35 days without further expense and I will not pursue you for my costs. If you persist then I will charge in full for my time at £18 per hour plus my out-of-pocket expenses and damages for harassment.

3. Notice of cancellation of contract
I hereby give notice of withdrawal from this alleged 'contract' which was never properly offered by you and certainly was not expressly agreed. This 'contract' is hereby cancelled and any obligations now end. If you offer - and if I decide to use - IAS or POPLA, then the contract ends immediately on the date of their decision (whatever the outcome) so my notice of cancellation still applies. The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation & Additional Payments) Regulations apply now to every consumer contract, save for a few exemptions, which parking contracts are not. It is the will of Parliament following the EU Consumer Rights Directive, that express consent is obtained for consumer contracts now - not implied consent - and that information is provided in a durable medium in advance.

You have failed to meet these requirements. The foisting of unexpected contracts like this on consumers, by stealth, is a thing of the past.

By replying to the challenge you are acknowledging receipt and acceptance of points 2 and 3 above. If you decide to persist with this unwarranted threat, I will be put to unnecessary expense and hours of time in appealing or defending this matter. As such, you will be liable for my costs and a pre-estimate of my loss - and in contrast with yours, mine is genuine - is that this sum will be likely to exceed £100.

I have kept proof of submission of this challenge. I look forward to your considered reply within 35 days.

Yours faithfully,

[IC1967]

My advice would be to not pay and to ignore their letters. However I know some people that have had this kind of thing happen to them and they have paid up.

It all depends on how mentally strong you are and whether the ratcheting up of pressure this type of company indulges in is something you can withstand easily. If it causes you sleepless nights and stress then it may be worth paying up just to rid yourself of this stress.

It's not what I would do because I am extremely mentally strong and laugh every time I get one of these threatening letters. Unfortunately most people are not as strong and panic and suffer from stress for months.

If you are weak is it really worth the stress of not paying up?

[Bentley Bullet]

I agree with myself! Sorry, IC1967. Tell them to f**k off.

[Dagenham Rover]

Its a pretty long winded way of saying feck off however thats  the answer its not legally enforceable they pray on threatening letters hold your bottle if they start threatening, there is loads of info out there

[IC1967]

Its a pretty long winded way of saying feck off however thats  the answer its not legally enforceable they pray on threatening letters hold your bottle if they start threatening, there is loads of info out there

No need to access the loads of info out there. When the letters arrive just shred them and forget about them.

Sorted.

[Dagenham Rover]

Its a pretty long winded way of saying feck off however thats  the answer its not legally enforceable they pray on threatening letters hold your bottle if they start threatening, there is loads of info out there

No need to access the loads of info out there. When the letters arrive just shred them and forget about them.

Sorted.

feck me for probably the only time in my life I agree with you   

[IC1967]

Be honest. I speak so much sense you probably agree with most of what I say.

Don't be scared to admit it. Silly Billy may turn against you but that is a price well worth paying.

[Bentley Bullet]

I think it's because Daggers has realised that me and thee are the same person! And we'd have gotten away with it if it wasn't for that pesky Lipsy. Mind you don't knock him, he's fwiends with the mighty BST now.....Fwiends!

[Filo]

Thanks for your comments.

I received my Notice of Parking charge last week and after a few days pondering whether to pay or not I decided to appeal. I did use the flow chart and newbies thread, basically copy and pasted a template with my details. I'd expect a rejection letter but then I have to follow it up to the POI? this is where it supposedly gets dismissed. Here's the template that I sent.

Dear Sirs

Re: PCN No. *******

I challenge this 'PCN' as keeper of the car, on these main grounds:

a). The sum does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss, nor is it a core price term. It is a disguised penalty and not commercially justified.
b). As keeper I believe that the signs were not seen, the wording is ambiguous and the predominant purpose of your business model is intended to be a deterrent.
c). There is no evidence that you have any proprietary interest in the land.
d). Your 'Notice' fails to comply with the POFA 2012 and breaches various consumer contract/unfair terms Regulations.
e). There was no consideration nor acceptance flowing from both parties and any contract with myself, or the driver, is denied.

Your clients should be thoroughly ashamed of the shoddy way you treat consumers visiting their premises. The landowner will be made fully aware of this matter and your response, which I will forward to their CEO when I complain in writing and via social media, as appropriate. Parking firms like yours fail to demonstrate even a basic understanding of customer service. The reputation of your business model appears to be more akin to a protection racket than 'parking management'. Your ATA may offer sound-bites about driving up standards or fight for motorists' rights but in reality they are not a regulator; they merely exist to represent the interests of paying members, in order to gain access to DVLA data. The public have no faith in the private parking industry and, as far as I have seen, your firm has not shown itself to be any different than the ex-clampers with whom you share a membership.

The purpose of this communication is:

1. Formal challenge
There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. As such, you must either rely on the POFA 2012 or cancel the charge. I suggest you uphold this challenge now or alternatively, send a rejection letter - subject to accepting my claim for costs as clearly stated below, since you have no case.


2. ''Drop hands'' offer
The extravagant 'parking charge' is baseless but I realise that you may have incurred nominal postage costs. Equally, I have incurred costs to date, for researching the law and responding to your junk mail dressed up to impersonate a parking ticket. It is clear that my costs and yours, at this point, do not exceed £15. Therefore, this is a formal “drop hands” offer. I remind you of the duty to mitigate any loss, so withdraw the spurious charge within 35 days without further expense and I will not pursue you for my costs. If you persist then I will charge in full for my time at £18 per hour plus my out-of-pocket expenses and damages for harassment.

3. Notice of cancellation of contract
I hereby give notice of withdrawal from this alleged 'contract' which was never properly offered by you and certainly was not expressly agreed. This 'contract' is hereby cancelled and any obligations now end. If you offer - and if I decide to use - IAS or POPLA, then the contract ends immediately on the date of their decision (whatever the outcome) so my notice of cancellation still applies. The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation & Additional Payments) Regulations apply now to every consumer contract, save for a few exemptions, which parking contracts are not. It is the will of Parliament following the EU Consumer Rights Directive, that express consent is obtained for consumer contracts now - not implied consent - and that information is provided in a durable medium in advance.

You have failed to meet these requirements. The foisting of unexpected contracts like this on consumers, by stealth, is a thing of the past.

By replying to the challenge you are acknowledging receipt and acceptance of points 2 and 3 above. If you decide to persist with this unwarranted threat, I will be put to unnecessary expense and hours of time in appealing or defending this matter. As such, you will be liable for my costs and a pre-estimate of my loss - and in contrast with yours, mine is genuine - is that this sum will be likely to exceed £100.

I have kept proof of submission of this challenge. I look forward to your considered reply within 35 days.

Yours faithfully,

You've done the wrong thing appealing, it now proves to them that you have received their threatening letters, totally ignoring them is the best option

[wilts rover]

I think it's because Daggers has realised that me and thee are the same person! And we'd have gotten away with it if it wasn't for that pesky Lipsy. Mind you don't knock him, he's fwiends with the mighty BST now.....Fwiends!

Are you feeling OK BB? Maybe you should go for a lie down?

[IC1967]

Thanks for your comments.

I received my Notice of Parking charge last week and after a few days pondering whether to pay or not I decided to appeal. I did use the flow chart and newbies thread, basically copy and pasted a template with my details. I'd expect a rejection letter but then I have to follow it up to the POI? this is where it supposedly gets dismissed. Here's the template that I sent.

Dear Sirs

Re: PCN No. *******

I challenge this 'PCN' as keeper of the car, on these main grounds:

a). The sum does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss, nor is it a core price term. It is a disguised penalty and not commercially justified.
b). As keeper I believe that the signs were not seen, the wording is ambiguous and the predominant purpose of your business model is intended to be a deterrent.
c). There is no evidence that you have any proprietary interest in the land.
d). Your 'Notice' fails to comply with the POFA 2012 and breaches various consumer contract/unfair terms Regulations.
e). There was no consideration nor acceptance flowing from both parties and any contract with myself, or the driver, is denied.

Your clients should be thoroughly ashamed of the shoddy way you treat consumers visiting their premises. The landowner will be made fully aware of this matter and your response, which I will forward to their CEO when I complain in writing and via social media, as appropriate. Parking firms like yours fail to demonstrate even a basic understanding of customer service. The reputation of your business model appears to be more akin to a protection racket than 'parking management'. Your ATA may offer sound-bites about driving up standards or fight for motorists' rights but in reality they are not a regulator; they merely exist to represent the interests of paying members, in order to gain access to DVLA data. The public have no faith in the private parking industry and, as far as I have seen, your firm has not shown itself to be any different than the ex-clampers with whom you share a membership.

The purpose of this communication is:

1. Formal challenge
There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. As such, you must either rely on the POFA 2012 or cancel the charge. I suggest you uphold this challenge now or alternatively, send a rejection letter - subject to accepting my claim for costs as clearly stated below, since you have no case.


2. ''Drop hands'' offer
The extravagant 'parking charge' is baseless but I realise that you may have incurred nominal postage costs. Equally, I have incurred costs to date, for researching the law and responding to your junk mail dressed up to impersonate a parking ticket. It is clear that my costs and yours, at this point, do not exceed £15. Therefore, this is a formal “drop hands” offer. I remind you of the duty to mitigate any loss, so withdraw the spurious charge within 35 days without further expense and I will not pursue you for my costs. If you persist then I will charge in full for my time at £18 per hour plus my out-of-pocket expenses and damages for harassment.

3. Notice of cancellation of contract
I hereby give notice of withdrawal from this alleged 'contract' which was never properly offered by you and certainly was not expressly agreed. This 'contract' is hereby cancelled and any obligations now end. If you offer - and if I decide to use - IAS or POPLA, then the contract ends immediately on the date of their decision (whatever the outcome) so my notice of cancellation still applies. The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation & Additional Payments) Regulations apply now to every consumer contract, save for a few exemptions, which parking contracts are not. It is the will of Parliament following the EU Consumer Rights Directive, that express consent is obtained for consumer contracts now - not implied consent - and that information is provided in a durable medium in advance.

You have failed to meet these requirements. The foisting of unexpected contracts like this on consumers, by stealth, is a thing of the past.

By replying to the challenge you are acknowledging receipt and acceptance of points 2 and 3 above. If you decide to persist with this unwarranted threat, I will be put to unnecessary expense and hours of time in appealing or defending this matter. As such, you will be liable for my costs and a pre-estimate of my loss - and in contrast with yours, mine is genuine - is that this sum will be likely to exceed £100.

I have kept proof of submission of this challenge. I look forward to your considered reply within 35 days.

Yours faithfully,

You've done the wrong thing appealing, it now proves to them that you have received their threatening letters, totally ignoring them is the best option

It's not the wrong thing but Filo is right that you should just ignore them. There is nothing they can do. By replying to them they know they are getting to you and this will mean they will intensify their efforts to get you to crack and hand over the money. Stay strong and just laugh when they send you another letter. It is them that will then be out of pocket by constantly pestering you.

[BillyStubbsTears]

I think it's because Daggers has realised that me and thee are the same person! And we'd have gotten away with it if it wasn't for that pesky Lipsy. Mind you don't knock him, he's fwiends with the mighty BST now.....Fwiends!

Lipsy and me are mates?

News to me. I think he's a t**t. And I'm sure it's mutual.

[Donnywolf]

There is a the whole transcript of a Case of Ibbotson v Wickes at Scunny ... the best bit is on Page 15

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fforums.pepipoo.com%2Findex.php%3Fact%3Dattach%26type%3Dpost%26id%3D16231%2529&ei=sfYWVZC5CZTaas7FgJgO&usg=AFQjCNHEkbAFSnD7JjbflASUzLu88a1xzA&bvm=bv.89381419,d.ZWU


First words spoken by Judge ... it is self explanatory after that



You have signed statements of truth which say you adhere to the Code of Practice. You do not. To sign a statement of truth when it is not correct has significant implications. If you have issued any other proceeding in this land on the basis of this dispute, you are in serious trouble. Am I absolutely clear?

16 MISS COATES: Yes, sir.

17 JUDGE M elL W AINE: Right. How many of these are going through the court system at the moment?

19 MISS COATES: Not that many, your Honour.
 
20 JUDGE MciL W AINE: I have to say to you that when you get into the office tomonow morning you had better have a look pretty quickly at what is going on. I will tell you now after these proceedings I will issue an alert so you are clear. I have had this case in my court and all judges with this case and this dispute are advised to look at the terms and conditions of contract. If you continue to pursue those cases on this flawed premise, the consequences will be significant. If there is another case in the Scunthorpe County Court, Grimsby County Court or Hull County Court live by four pm on Friday, you will be coming to see me and I suggest you bring a toothbrush. Am I clear?

27 MISS COATES: Very clear.

[BobG]

Martyn. Sadly, Filo is right. I know you have no reason to trust one person over another on here - but two people who have been through this both advised 'Don't respond to anything'. Now you have they are likely to focus much more attention on you. Once again, the advice is don't respond to ANYTHING!

Responding simply encourages these retards since they know you are getting their letters. So your response is simply an invitation to try to scare the shit out of you. The appeal thing is totally valueless. Did you check who you are appealing to? You have been warned. Do NOT respond!

BobG

[Filo]

There is a the whole transcript of a Case of Ibbotson v Wickes at Scunny ... the best bit is on Page 15

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fforums.pepipoo.com%2Findex.php%3Fact%3Dattach%26type%3Dpost%26id%3D16231%2529&ei=sfYWVZC5CZTaas7FgJgO&usg=AFQjCNHEkbAFSnD7JjbflASUzLu88a1xzA&bvm=bv.89381419,d.ZWU


First words spoken by Judge ... it is self explanatory after that



You have signed statements of truth which say you adhere to the Code of Practice. You do not. To sign a statement of truth when it is not correct has significant implications. If you have issued any other proceeding in this land on the basis of this dispute, you are in serious trouble. Am I absolutely clear?

16 MISS COATES: Yes, sir.

17 JUDGE M elL W AINE: Right. How many of these are going through the court system at the moment?

19 MISS COATES: Not that many, your Honour.
 
20 JUDGE MciL W AINE: I have to say to you that when you get into the office tomonow morning you had better have a look pretty quickly at what is going on. I will tell you now after these proceedings I will issue an alert so you are clear. I have had this case in my court and all judges with this case and this dispute are advised to look at the terms and conditions of contract. If you continue to pursue those cases on this flawed premise, the consequences will be significant. If there is another case in the Scunthorpe County Court, Grimsby County Court or Hull County Court live by four pm on Friday, you will be coming to see me and I suggest you bring a toothbrush. Am I clear?

27 MISS COATES: Very clear.

I think Miss Coates, needs to go back to law school!

[Orlandokarla]

I must add my voice to those advising never to respond. I've dealt with this type of crap for the last decade, and bar the letters threatening escalation etc, a single abusive phone call is as bad as it ever got. Even then, had I not answered the phone with the express intent of letting them know exactly what I thought of them, it wouldn't have happened.