CP Plus... here we go again

UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUMS THE UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUM (INTERACTIVE)
41

Dipper_Dave:

Harry Monk:
POPLA uphold each and every appeal because the law is on my side, and not that of CP Plus. I’m surprised to see drivers on here (don’t mean you here Toby) advocating that hauliers should pull their pants down and get shafted by a company which regularly appears on programmes such as “Watchdog” because of their spurious and illegal business practices.

Yep the POPLA appeal is binding on the operator and don’t get me wrong I am on your side for not paying these rip off invoices.

However your high-horse stumbles a bit when you knowingly do this on a regular basis, perhaps you are heading for a fall or maybe you will always get away with it as the gullable public that pay the fines will help support you. But at the end of the day (sorry a phrase I hate to use) you are knowingly breaching a contract (insert to add that the validity of this contract is debateabul) due to the stupidity and greed of the other party in the contract.

I wish you luck and I am happy for you not to pay, I just wish everyone else would follow suit untill these cowboys just send an invoice for the true amount in which case your POPLA appeal would fail.

Sorry Dave but you are completely wrong and I think you are missing the point.
It is reasonable to pay a FAIR charge to park on private land. However what is happening here is a private company attempting to charge an UNFAIR amount of money because the original charge was not paid (whether or not the original charge was fair is a whole different debate) for a person to park on SOMEONE ELSES land.

You are also missing the point that what these companies aer doing HAS NO BASIS WHATSOEVER in law. The charges they issue really are speculative invoices, they do not represent a genuine reflection of the original charge plus a bit of admin cost for sending you the letter. And if you take the time to read the letter you will see that it will say things like ‘if you are not the driver you should forward the name and address of the person who was driving’ etc etc. There is nothing under law that forces you to do this. It would be like me walking up to you and asking for the details of your best mate - you would be completely within your rights to politely invite me to get stuffed. The emphasis here is on the word ‘should’.
If you compare this to a letter issued by the Police or local authority you can see the difference - these letters are issued under Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and are a statutory request for information which cannot be ignored - you either admit it was you or tell them who it was (in fact you may remember a certain politician and his wife ending up in prison for not telling the truth when requested to do so under this piece of legislation)

these cowboys have no power whatsoever to issue a Section 172 request for information, they just dress their letters up to look like one. What they do is not illegal but then it is also not legal - it is exploiting a loophole in the law - you do not have to respond to these letters. They can only pursue you through the civil courts, the police wold not get involved at all (unless you turned up at their offices and offered to burn the place down). The bailiffs would only ever be involved if the court found against you and you refused to pay. (In fact there have been court cases where a ruling was made in favour of the cowboy company and they were awarded sums under £50 in recompense)

What these companys are doing is issuing you the speculative invoice and hoping that you pay it. It’s like me asking you to pay for reading this post.
If you go here moneysavingexpert.com/reclai … ng-tickets, there is a lot of good information on just what nefarious practices these companies get up to and how to fight them.
you should also check out this website: parking-prankster.com/home.html
They have made millions out of general ignorance and I find their attitude and working practices to be the lowest of the low.
There was also a change in the law regarding contracts last year I’m trying to fidn the link to it. From hazy memory, there needs to be genuine offer and acceptance for a contract to be legally binding now - it is not enough to tell someone or show someone that they are entering into a contract, they must demonstrate genuine acceptance of the offer for the contract to be binding. There was also something in the news earlier this year from a top barrister who believes that it should be tested in law to see if the ridiculous charges these thieves claim is actually genuine or not.

Do not ever, ever pay one of these speculative invoices they are just requests for money with threats. Arm yourself with knowledge about the law surrounding this subject and don’t be taken for a fool.

42

nurglets:

Harry Monk:
Firstly, as well as the £700 a year road tax, I pay around £8,000 a year in VAT and £30,000 a year in fuel duty. As far as I’m concerned, I’ve paid more than enough tax to entitle me to park for the night when the law requires me to do.

Thats a crap argument, why not park in a layby or other public property spot, and not privately owned and maintained (I know thats a laugh seeing some service station areas) land because None of your road tax, vat or fuel duty goes to them.

My argument would be as lorry drivers we’re regular users of their services, a lot go in and spend money for the privilege of getting bent over backwards when paying for a coffee and sarnie, so why charge over the odds for having to take a 9 or 11hr in a dodgy, badly lit, smelly, tarmacked patch a mile away from the loos. I’d pay a few quid now and then for that, but 20 quid plus is taking the ■■■■ in my opinion.

Think you will find that the majority of motorway services are built on land owned by the tax payer, leased to motorway service providers.

43

I think this company requires a kicking and since my buddy, the local MP is seeking re-election, time for him to earn my vote. Seems this company is
being aided and abetted in corruption by a Government organisation, the DVLA so it is to them I shall direct my initial bile.

44

DeeBee:
Sorry Dave but you are completely wrong and I think you are missing the point.
It is reasonable to pay a FAIR charge to park on private land. However what is happening here is a private company attempting to charge an UNFAIR amount of money because the original charge was not paid (whether or not the original charge was fair is a whole different debate) for a person to park on SOMEONE ELSES land.

You are also missing the point that what these companies aer doing HAS NO BASIS WHATSOEVER in law. The charges they issue really are speculative invoices, they do not represent a genuine reflection of the original charge plus a bit of admin cost for sending you the letter. And if you take the time to read the letter you will see that it will say things like ‘if you are not the driver you should forward the name and address of the person who was driving’ etc etc. There is nothing under law that forces you to do this. It would be like me walking up to you and asking for the details of your best mate - you would be completely within your rights to politely invite me to get stuffed. The emphasis here is on the word ‘should’.
If you compare this to a letter issued by the Police or local authority you can see the difference - these letters are issued under Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and are a statutory request for information which cannot be ignored - you either admit it was you or tell them who it was (in fact you may remember a certain politician and his wife ending up in prison for not telling the truth when requested to do so under this piece of legislation)

these cowboys have no power whatsoever to issue a Section 172 request for information, they just dress their letters up to look like one. What they do is not illegal but then it is also not legal - it is exploiting a loophole in the law - you do not have to respond to these letters. They can only pursue you through the civil courts, the police wold not get involved at all (unless you turned up at their offices and offered to burn the place down). The bailiffs would only ever be involved if the court found against you and you refused to pay. (In fact there have been court cases where a ruling was made in favour of the cowboy company and they were awarded sums under £50 in recompense)

What these companys are doing is issuing you the speculative invoice and hoping that you pay it. It’s like me asking you to pay for reading this post.
If you go here moneysavingexpert.com/reclai … ng-tickets, there is a lot of good information on just what nefarious practices these companies get up to and how to fight them.
you should also check out this website: parking-prankster.com/home.html
They have made millions out of general ignorance and I find their attitude and working practices to be the lowest of the low.
There was also a change in the law regarding contracts last year I’m trying to fidn the link to it. From hazy memory, there needs to be genuine offer and acceptance for a contract to be legally binding now - it is not enough to tell someone or show someone that they are entering into a contract, they must demonstrate genuine acceptance of the offer for the contract to be binding. There was also something in the news earlier this year from a top barrister who believes that it should be tested in law to see if the ridiculous charges these thieves claim is actually genuine or not.

Do not ever, ever pay one of these speculative invoices they are just requests for money with threats. Arm yourself with knowledge about the law surrounding this subject and don’t be taken for a fool.

Excellent post, totally on the money. Shame there are one or two people here who are unable to understand this.

45

@Harry Monk, so if you get a minimum of 1 CP speculative invoice’s each week, that means that just in this year you have had around 8 to10 of them and have appealed every one which POPLA have upheld. How do POPLA inform you of their decision by email, text, phone or post ?, the reason I ask is that my sister recently received one of these spec; invoices and went into a bit of a panic about it, especially when I told her to just file it in the bin. She had only been over the free parking time by about 15mins (in her car) but didn’t know about the ANPR camera’s they now use to check you in and out. Also, it would help if you could give us the contact details of POPLA so that I can pass that on to her and if you have any kind of hard copy of POPLA’s decision to uphold your appeal’s that you could scan and pass on it would be really helpful, because at the moment she think’s I’m just talking out of my arse and if she doesn’t pay up the bill will go up and the bailiffs will be knocking on her door.

Thanks & Regards
Dave Penn;

46

bigvern1:
Doesn’t detract from the fact that it is a service for which we are charged and should pay for. Refusing to pay is immoral and doesn’t make you big and clever by not paying.

Still not a bite!! :smiley: :smiley:

47

Dipper_Dave:

Harry Monk:
Every week, when I get home, I have one of these waiting on the doormat, sometimes two, occasionally three.

Why not just pay the parking fee, even get the meal voucher as well all tax deductable.

By habitually not paying for parking knowing that POPLA will (for now) uphold the complaint you are losing the moral high ground a bit.

Don’t get me wrong we all hate these speculative invoices and your advice is great on how to get out of the odd one or two.
As long as theres little human interaction and most of the work is done by computer anyway you have little to worry about. As long as these cowboy firms rely on those who cough up the £60 that far outweigh those that don’t you will be fine.

I understand your an owner driver but surely your profit margin isn’t so tight that you can’t factor in parking costs.

Yes but it helps Harry to undercut other hauliers maybe :wink:

weeto:
Think you will find that the majority of motorway services are built on land owned by the tax payer, leased to motorway service providers.

I think you’ll find depending how you count the Msa’s ‘locations/sites’ between 27% & 33% are under lease.

The rest were sold in the 90’s or privately developed.

48

This is even better…just checked out the CP claim again, the photo showing time arriving and the photo showing time leaving…well it’s two
identical pictures. I do feel the stress, the effort I am making in proving this fraud has already reached about £3 million quid cost to me and
that’s an hours work, seems a reasonable charge…where will it end?

49

davepenn54:
@Harry Monk, so if you get a minimum of 1 CP speculative invoice’s each week, that means that just in this year you have had around 8 to10 of them and have appealed every one which POPLA have upheld. How do POPLA inform you of their decision by email, text, phone or post ?, the reason I ask is that my sister recently received one of these spec; invoices and went into a bit of a panic about it, especially when I told her to just file it in the bin. She had only been over the free parking time by about 15mins (in her car) but didn’t know about the ANPR camera’s they now use to check you in and out. Also, it would help if you could give us the contact details of POPLA so that I can pass that on to her and if you have any kind of hard copy of POPLA’s decision to uphold your appeal’s that you could scan and pass on it would be really helpful, because at the moment she think’s I’m just talking out of my arse and if she doesn’t pay up the bill will go up and the bailiffs will be knocking on her door.

Thanks & Regards
Dave Penn;

You can deal with it either by post or by email. It’s very easy, there are only two stages.

  1. Appeal to CP Plus on the grounds that “The amount claimed is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss”. CP Plus will reject this appeal, but give you a POPLA reference number.

  2. Go on POPLA’s website and appeal, type in the reference number and your grounds for appeal, namely “The amount claimed is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss”.

About two months later your sister will receive a letter like this, either by post or email. There will be a detailed account explaining why the POPLA adjudicator has upheld the appeal, but it will basically confirm that CP Plus’ claim was not a genuine pre-estimate of loss.

CP Plus are crooks. Don’t hesitate to take them on and give them a good kicking. :stuck_out_tongue:

50

Company policy dictates that I stay on a proper parking area, and not in a layby if I’m loaded.

I fork out for it and get it back in the following week’s wages. The majority of parking areas are rammed when I get to them, I’m going to pay when I finally get parked. Why does someone who has no intention of contributing a bean have more of a right to that space than me?

51

PaulNowak:
Why does someone who has no intention of contributing a bean have more of a right to that space than me?

Because the world is full of thieves?

Take Harry for example he wouldn’t have any speculative invoices from CP If he paid to park as per the landowners perfectly legal request If he doesn’t like it he could find somewhere else to park but chooses not to.

What is happening now is a consequence of the banning of clamping to deter selfish behaviour by some and the advent of anpr technology rather than a car park attendant.

This has led to virtually no protection for landowners to prevent parking on their land.

The problem with MSA’s is that they may struggle to prevent queues with barriers due to the turnover of vehicles going through the site/barriers,
I’ve not been to Lymm for a while but it is a prime example of people driving into, through and the wrong way through traffic barriers to save paying for parking.

52

speedyguy:
This has led to virtually no protection for landowners to prevent parking on their land.

I post for the benefit of truck drivers, not land owners.

53

Do you push your trolley out of Asda because it’s unlikely that they’ll bang you through the justice system?

54

i get a few of these each year,mainly because we sign into the services when doing a long repair which stops the majority of them
coming through the post.
a recent one arrived from CP charging for an overstay in a farmfoods car park,while repairing a vehicle delivering there,even though the manager said the camera’s didn’t work.
good interesting read though.

55

toby1234abc:
So Raymundo, you expect free parking on your ship in the docks, and they unload it for free.

Yus mate, cos that’s included in the ‘charter party’ or the agreement of terms and payment or conditions of carriage (call it what you will)

56

Thanks Harry that is exactly the sort info I was looking for ! Whether she will just pay out of fear or now go into the appeal process is entirely up to her, but I will be to able to show her irrefutable evidence that these scurrilous non-fines can be beaten.

Thanks Harry and long may you win against the ‘Modern Day Unmasked Highwayman’. :imp:

Regrards
Dave Penn;

57

dont mind paying upto £10 too park but the rates the services are charging now are getting out of hand, 1 of our’s last week stayed in services each night and forked out a £110 in parking fee’s alone.

58

toby1234abc:
Be careful Harry, the Msa operations could call the Police the next time you park and it could get nasty until all the money is paid back to them via a court order and bailiffs seizing your lorry, freezing your bank account and other assets.

I knew the Police do not get involved with civil matters, but the point I was making, if the money was not paid, they could get a court order, using High court bailifs to obtain the unpaid parking, plus the interest and court charges, with the bailiffs fee.
Refusing to pay then, the bailiffs can then call the Police if an obstruction happened to stop the Bailiffs carrying out their warrant.

This happens to people in houses or at business premises, by being mobile all the time in the lorry, it would be impossible to find out where to enforce the High court order.

59

The OP isn’t concerned about other truck drivers. He’s just trying to be a smart arse. Don’t pay or pay It’s up to you, but I wouldn’t take the advice offered. Each to their own and all that.

60

speedyguy:

PaulNowak:
Why does someone who has no intention of contributing a bean have more of a right to that space than me?

Because the world is full of thieves?

Take Harry for example he wouldn’t have any speculative invoices from CP If he paid to park as per the landowners perfectly legal request If he doesn’t like it he could find somewhere else to park but chooses not to.

What is happening now is a consequence of the banning of clamping to deter selfish behaviour by some and the advent of anpr technology rather than a car park attendant.

This has led to virtually no protection for landowners to prevent parking on their land.

The problem with MSA’s is that they may struggle to prevent queues with barriers due to the turnover of vehicles going through the site/barriers,
I’ve not been to Lymm for a while but it is a prime example of people driving into, through and the wrong way through traffic barriers to save paying for parking.

again the point is being missed here.

regardless of how the situation arises (i.e. a genuine overstay for whatever reason, forgot to pay or wilful refusal to pay the parking charge) these cowboy companies are behaving as if they have a legal right to charge you an obscene amount of money. They don’t. They have no legal right whatsoever to charge you even a single penny over the cost of your overstay plus reasonable expenses (usually comes to about £25). there is absolutely no basis in law for what they are doing. Instead, they issue the charge and hope that your ignorance of the law works in their favour. the letter they send is dressed up to look like a statutory request for information and the language used is threatening.

In fact Dave Penns sister is a perfect example of this in action - she has received a speculative invoice through the post, thinks it is a genuine penalty charge notice and probably would have paid it by now if Dave hadn’t stopped her. From his post I can tell that he’s going to have an argument on his hands to convince her to not pay it. but if you think about it, why is this happening? I’m willing to bet my truck it’s because she is simply unaware of the law regarding this (and the fact that there isn’t any). So she would now be £100 worse off because she was taken in by this scam.

Knowlege is power and in this case the knowledge is there in the links I provided. It’s your choice as to whether you give money to thieves for writing you a letter.

I do pay for parking and, like a lot of other drivers, I often begrudge paying even that for the parking space I am renting is usually miles from any amenities, stinks of urine and utterly filthy. However I’ve had alot of dealing with these cowboys in the past issuing speculative invoices when my vehicles were parked for deliveries etc. Always ignored them, never been taken to court, prevented the theft of thousands from companies I’ve worked for.