In February 2015

I borrowed my girlfriends car to go to Liverpool Airport where I had parking booked.

When I got to the airport I couldn't find the car park company I had booked.

After driving round for a while I decided to ask for directions.

It was 4:30 in the morning and there was no-one around except for a van parked on the path.

I asked the van driver for directions but she would not help.

It turns out this van was a mobile camera for Vehicle Control Services

and they issued a charge while I was asking their driver for directions!

My girlfriend as the registered keeper received the charge notice.

After doing lots of research on the internet we took the consensus advice and ignored the notice.

We received further threatening notices which we ignored.

We then got threatening letters from a company called Debt Recovery Plus who threatened legal action.

We did more research and discovered the Protection of freedoms Acts

so we then e-mailed both Debt Recovery and VCS to inform them that I was the driver

and not my girlfriend so they could not persue her for payment.

We heard nothing for several months

have now received a letter from a company called BW Legal who are acting for VCS.

They want the original charge plus penalty. They are threatening county court proceedings.

what I want to know is can they take legal action against the registered owner,

even when she wasn't the driver and has informed VCS of that?

Should we just pay up?

Thanks in advance!

if its that old you can continue to ignore

BW legal ..blimey getting all the way through to the Lowell group are they now.

read the letter careful doesn't say will anything.

silly idea to tell anyone who the driver was mind.

just never ever ignore a claimform

this demand has no legs for a large number of reasons

and that is why it has been given to a dca rather than being dealt with by VCS

The land is not "relevant land" for the PoFA to be relevant

so you then have to consider what contract you made by talking to the blokes in the van.

Did you agree with them that they could charge you for asking them a question? I doubt it.

This means that VCS cant now decide that they can and that is why they arent pursuing you.

Many people confuse dca's with bailiffs and they are as aloke as chalk and cheese.

Ignore them

Thanks for the replies and advice! I understand that these letters are just to scare people, but what will happen if we ignore them? Won't they just start legal proceedings? Will we have to defend ourselves in court?

The DCA can't start proceedings against you, Justin, only VCS could do that.

In the unlikely event that you get a court claim form, you don't ignore it. Come back here and we'll help.

Have a read of some other VCS threads and you'll get an idea of how things go with them.

HB

As mentioned on the other thread (before the split) BW are acting on behalf of VCS (AKA Excel) and can take no action.

VCS are part of the IPC and will assume that the keeper is the driver. The keeper is under no obligation to name the driver so if VCS were foolish enough to take court action (unlikely) the keeper can legally say they were not the driver.This is because VCS do not follow PoFA 2012

As an aside, BW Legal have got less work since Lowell formed their own litigation department so they are barrel scraping to justify their existence.

Hi All

now we've got another letter from BW Legal stating that

even though my girlfriend provided details of the driver to VCS,

because there's been no payment

VCS is entitled to persue the registered keeper for payment under the Protections of Freedom Act 2012.

Is this true?

They are also saying to avoid further costs we should pay up now.

What should we do?

Continue to ignore them?

Many thannks!

simply messengers guessing what might happen.

willy waving

very much out of time for a speculative invoice from jan 2015:lol:

BW Legal can do nothing but send letters as already stated.

If a PPC is given the name and address of the driver then there is no keeper liability under schedule 4 of the POFA.

VCS do not even use the POFA at JLA ( it's not relevant land anyway ), so the original NTK will say they assume the RK is the driver.

So in summary, ignore them

BW Legal have somehow got hold of my girlfriends mobile phone number and have been trying to call her!

This is almost harassment!!

Has anyone else had this experience?

It seems unfair that they resort to calling people to scare them into paying.....

..are they allowed to do that?

We don't even know how they got her number!

You can report them to the FCA for breaching debt collection guidelines

but would be better off ignoring them.

Straight to voicemail so it costs them money and leaves evidence of their behaviour.

They buy lists of numbers from the companies that do credit checks for third parties such as certain shops and more likely the phone service provider.

Only unlawful if specifically ticked box saying it cant be passed on etc OR your g/f is not the keeper or financially connected to you.

Hi HB and Co

We have now received yet another letter from BW Legal,

similar I think to the one Motobrooks has mentioned.

It gives us another two weeks to pay up.

It lists the additional costs we might have to pay if it goes to court,

and mentions the case of ParkingEye Limited V Beavis,

saying this case eliminates the main defence we would have in court.

Please can you tell me what we should do?

Should we continue to ignore BW Legal or reply to them?

If we should reply, what should we say?

Many thanks.

Hello again.

Are you able to scan up the letter minus identifying details please? pdf is best.

HB

eliminates the main defence?

my god, not only are these lawyers so brilliant they cant read properly they are now clairvoyant.

As yourself,

why have they written again giving you another fortnight to pay up if their clients case was watertight?

the truth is that their client usually gets spanked in court for various reasons that have nothing to do with the Beavis decision, commony they have no right to make claims, they are suing the wrong person etc.

Complain to the SRA about harassment regarding the phone calls.

They are not acting as solicitors but are registered as such so it will get back to them that you arent taking any of their nonsense.

Having done a little research, the charge is unlawful anyway as the signs and cameras had no planning permission at the time of the 'infringement' There was a retrospective planning permission applied for in July 2015 but at the time of your 'event' there was no planning permission so they have no legs to stand on.

Planning Application

Hi Silverfox.

The camera they used for my "infringement" was a mobile camera on a van. Do they need planning permission for them?

How do you suggest I should proceed? Should we continue to ignore the letters from BW Legal or should we repy to them?

Thanks

Justin.

Personally I would let them take action but I am not you.

In the letter, they say that as the IAS have dismissed the appeal it is likely a judge would come to the same conclusion. Utter bowlarks!

If you wish to contact them, simply refer to the lack of planning permission for the signage which would be raised should a court claim be issued plus of course the usual stuff related on this thread. Once they know that you will fight them, I suggest they will drop this. Then again, these people rely on ignorance to try it on and hope to get a default judgement.

JustinN05 I am following this post as i am in a similar position, so please keep updating! I am intrigued to see where it goes. Have you had anymore letters? Have you replied?

Thanks

C

I intend to send BW Legal as slimmed down version of this. I propose the following. Any thoughts? I expect this will get a string of mails but I will revert to not replying until I get something from a court.

Dear Sirs

Your Ref: ***********

I refer to your letter dated 20 June 2016.

I have no intention of paying the money demanded by your client and any court proceedings will be vigorously defended.

You should note that this charge is disputed and you must now refer this matter back to your client and cease and desist all contact with me. I will not respond to any further communication on this unless it comes from a court.

I trust I have made myself clear.

Yours faithfully

my thread is here:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?466328-VCS-BW-Legal-threatening-Court-29-7-2015-PCN

got one of two of those letters from BW, could you post me the debt denied template: please ,cheers in advance

post 19

KISS

keep it simple stupid

dx

hi would you post me a copy ? cheers Aristilus

I would stick with the simple 2 line version in post 19

the more your introduce

the more you open yourself up to debate with them

esp if they bring it up in court.

dx

thread closed to stop numerous newbie postings

dx