I would like to thank everyone for the advice given. About 1 or 2 weeks after I have sent my letter I got a letter from BW Legal saying that the issue is on hold while they get further instructions from their client and that they would reply as soon as they know more. This was now over a month ago and I haven't heard anything from them since. I guess any reply from them would be an acknowledgement that they were wrong and had no right to process my data. Should I send them a nice letter now requesting that they send me all the data they hold on me and request them to delete the data? Or should they be reported to the ICO for unlawful processing of my data?

So is this insulting enough?

How about this: NCP and BW Legal should know the Protection of Freedoms act 2012 and they should have known that there is no Keepers Liability in this case, that the Parking Charge Notice to Keeper was not in accordance with the POFA and hence that there is no cause for action. Given this, your client had no rights to process my data and you should have reported this breach to the ICO. Has anyone from NCP or BW Legal actually checked this case yet or is this still an autogenerated ‘threatogram’? Should you managed to convince your client to waste their money on a spurious claim that is doomed to fail - then please go ahead. It wouldn’t be the first time BW Legal ends up on the losing side (you might want to check VCS v Phillip, Claim number C9DP2D6C Liverpool 07/12/2016 - interesting reading).

Are you referring to the addition or the complete text? I am not interested in fighting a holy war with them here. The information provided (e.g. about the dates) will not change. I think if I just send an insulting letter it is more likely to go to court.

What about this addition: NCP and BW Legal should know the Protection of Freedoms act 2012 and they should have known that there is no Keepers Liability in this case, that the Parking Charge Notice to Keeper was not in accordance with the POFA and hence that there is no cause for action. Given this your client had no rights to process my data (see GDPR Art 6 Lawfulness of processing) and you should have reported this breach to the ICO. BW Legal has been in breach of this before, see VCS v Phillip, Claim number C9DP2D6C Liverpool 07/12/2016 I demand, in accordance with the GDPR, that all data relating to myself (the data subject) held by your client and BW Legal be provided to me (Art 14) and that such data is to be erased (Art. 17 1 (d)).

Do you have a link to this 'insulting' letter from EB (who is EB? Ericsbrother?). I've tried to search on this forum but haven't found any 'insulting' letter yet.

It seems like they are not giving up. I have received the 'Letter of Claim' today (see attached - let me know if you need all pages). Here is my draft, please let me know what you think. Dear Madam/Sir I have received a Letter of Claim regarding the above reference XXXXX. I, <My Name>, am the registered keeper of the vehicle XXXXXXX but I would like to dispute the debt as the Parking Charge Notice XXXXXX is void. Date of incident: 06/12/2018 Date of issue of Parking Charge Notice to Keeper: 24/12/2018 Date received: 28/12/2018 I am the registered keeper but I was NOT the driver on that particular day. The driver has informed me that s/he has paid the £2.50 after arriving at the car park. The Recovery of Unpaid Parking Charges is guided by the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4. The applicable section §9 specifies how this notice must be given: (4) The notice must be given by— (a) handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or (b) sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period. (5) The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 14 days beginning with the day after that on which the specified period of parking ended. (6) A notice sent by post is to be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, to have been delivered (and so “given” for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4)) on the second working day after the day on which it is posted; and for this purpose “working day” means any day other than a Saturday, Sunday or a public holiday in England and Wales. Here §9 (4) (b) and §9 (5) are the relevant sections. The parking incident was on the 6/12/2018. The notice should have been delivered within 14 days, so it should have been received by me by the 20th of December. However the notice was only issued on the 24th of December and received by me on the 28th. The notice is thereby invalid according to the Protection of Freedoms act 2012, Schedule 4, §6 (1) (b) and §9. Please note that §7 and 8 and thereby §6 (1) (a) is not applicable as a notice to the driver according to §7 was never given. You thereby have no rights under §4 to claim any unpaid parking charges from the keeper! The NCP has not met the keeper liability requirements and therefore keeper liability does not apply. The NCP can therefore only pursue the driver. As the keeper of the vehicle, I decline, as is my right, to provide the name of the driver(s) at the time. As the parking company have neither named the driver(s) nor provided any evidence as to who the driver(s) were I submit I am not liable to any charge. Secondly NCP claims that no parking payment was done. The ‘evidence’ provided by NCP are two pictures of the car entering and leaving the car park. This is NOT evidence that the parking charge was not paid. The driver has confirmed to me that the parking charge was indeed paid. There are two possibilities, a malfunction in the system of NCP or a mistake entering the registration number. Making a mistake in entering the registration number does not equate to ‘Parking without Payment’. It only highlights a problem in the NCP system which allows the driver to enter a registration number that is not currently in the carpark. The NCP system knows which cars are in the car park at any point - so why is it not checking for this when a registration number is entered? I am sure that an audit of the system will reveal that the registration number or a ‘similar number' not linked to any other car parked in the carpark at that point was entered and paid for during the parking period. Hence NCP never suffered any loss of income and cannot claim for unpaid parking. Please consider the information provided. You should come to the conclusion that the ‘Letter of Claim’ is not enforceable and I intent to fight it should you decide to bring it to the County Court regardless. Kind Regards xxxxx What do you think? I guess the best way is to send this via recorded delivery and not use their 'online' system. The have some reply form, I am inclined on not using it. Thanks for your help.

I returned form my holiday today and found a letter from bwlegal on behalf of NCP dated the 9th of April informing me that I have 14 days to pay (which would be today). I have attached the letter. Is this the 'last letter before claim' or is this letter still to be ignored?

Thanks

I have received the second letter from the 'Debt Collector' today telling me that this is their final letter before handing this over to the solicitor. I've tried to upload the scan but unfortunately the PDF is too big in size. Am I ignoring this letter as well and wait for the solicitor to contact me? How long until I can expect to hear from the solicitor? My problem is that I will be going on holiday at the end of March for 3 weeks. If I receive a 'final' letter during the holiday with e.g. a 14 day window in which to reply I would have a problem(?)

What other options are there? There is no ombudsman that could be used (only works for companies that are registered with it I think). You could try something like BBC Watchdog but how likely is it that they take this up? How much does it cost to do a claim? Can I claim expenses (e.g. for buying that Patricia Pearl's County Court guide)? I probably will send the letter without the county court part first and when they don't respond or are not refunding it I will send a 'Letter before claim'.

How about this: Dear Madam/Sir, During my phone call on the 24th of January 2019 you repeatedly refused to give me a refund for the faulty watch strap that I have returned to you and which you have received by signed delivery. I give hereby notice that I make use of my short-term right to reject the faulty product in accordance with the Consumer Rights Act of 2015 Section 20. This gives me the right to demand a full refund. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/20/enacted The Terms of Conditions you have on your website and which you used to refuse a refund are not valid as they are not in-line with the applicable legislation (See above). The Consumer Rights Act gives you 14 days to issue the refund. Should I not receive the refund by then, then I intend to issue proceedings against you in the county court.

But shouldn't we first write the letter to use the Short-term right to reject? So far it was all via the phone. If they don't respond or reject it again, then I can do the letter of claim but I first have to show that I gave them the opportunity to resolve this? I have found this template.: I have not received a reply to my letter dated 26 August 2015 regarding the faulty goods which I bought from you on 20 August 2015. This letter explained what is wrong with the goods and why I am entitled to a refund. I am once again requesting a full refund of the purchase price of £85 on the grounds that the goods were not of satisfactory quality under the Consumer Rights Act 2015. I enclose a copy of the proof of purchase. I would like a reply as soon as possible so that I know you have received this letter. If you don't agree to the refund, could you please then send me a detailed response saying why you don't agree. To avoid taking court action, I am willing to use Alternative Dispute Resolution to resolve this problem. If I do not receive a satisfactory response from you within 30 days of the date of this letter, I intend to issue proceedings against you in the county court without further notice. This may increase your liability for costs. I refer you to the Practice Direction on pre-action conduct under the Civil Procedure Rules, and in particular to paragraph 13-16 which sets out the sanctions the court may impose if you fail to comply with the Practice Direction. I look forward to your acknowledgement. Yours faithfully

Hi it is not a watch but a watch strap. It cost £50 Already printed their terms and condition and the return policy

I think this part might explain it: The Watch Strap Co is also bound by relevant codes of conduct as defined in regulation 5(3)(b) of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008. Copies of the Unfair Tradition Regulations 2008 can be found by visiting www.legislation.gov.uk They are using an outdated regulation! The company is new though only registered in April 2018