Monday, 16 December 2013

UKPC jump on LPC Law bandwagon

A post on pepipoo suggests that UKPC are considering following ParkingEye's lead and issue court claims in bulk.

This is an extremely profitable activity for parking companies because many people are scared by the mere threat of court and so pay up straight away. The parking company can add fictitious amounts onto the claim, vastly improving their profit margin. Most people are unaware that companies such as ParkingEye will actually settle the claim for much less than the numbers on the court claim form, because otherwise they lose vast amounts of money if the claim progresses to a hearing; money they cannot reclaim because the small claims court limits costs.

This is early days yet, so we still have to see what exactly will happen. The current situation is that UKPC have assigned debt collectors Debt Recover Plus to chase up old debts (from 2012) by writing threatening letters; they say the case will be passed to LPC Law to take further action on behalf of UKPC.

The Prankster wonders how this will turn out for UKPC - a couple of letters from LPC Law will soon see their charges swallowed up.

So, what should people who receive these letters do?

The Prankster does not know at this time.

If UKPC are bluffing then the letters could be ignored.

If UKPC really will do court, then they should send a Letter Before Claim first. However, as we have seen from ParkingEye, many of the letters they claim to send are never received.

The Prankster, in this situation, would take the initiative, write to the debt collector stating that any debt is denied, and write to the operator, appealing the charge and asking for a POPLA code; meanwhile also stating that any legal action should be preceded by a letter before claim complying with practice directions.

However, everybody will have to make their own choice until we see how things pan out.

Happy Parking

The Parking Prankster


  1. I'm a recipient of an old claim myself.
    Chase up came yesterday.
    Problem for UKPC is that these are pre-PoFA cases which require proof of who the driver was at the time.

  2. Aww! Shame ;-)

    These people really need to be taken to court for issuing threatening litigation. Sort of like what's happening to Prenda Law in the States.

  3. Could it be that Rachel has jumped ship from ParkingLie to UKPeeC?