Perfect, thank you

Thanks for reopening the thread. Please see attached letter received in response to the letter sent in post 76, incidentally the same person who received the letter in post 81. My reading of it suggests no action required but just checking in here!! Thanks as ever to all Gladstones letter June 21.pdf

None of the letters sent included any photographic evidence of her car being parked

So the ntk was in time - odd that my friend hasn’t been sent any photos though

Thanks, we were a bit confused re whether the NTK was out of time as post #4 from Dx says it was in time but post #7 by lookforinfo says it is out of time. I attach the relevant photos of the machine in the carpark BB photos.pdf

Sorry for delay but my friend has only just had a chance to return to take pictures of the signage which I am trying to get in a format to attach here. In the meantime, it does seem that the conditions are there to say that disabled badge holders have to register their car via email or telephone - which begs the question as to how you could do this if you did not have a phone on you. It would be helpful to know what is wrong with the letter before claim and I'm also unsure on whether the ntk was out of time or not. Thanks

Really would like some tips as to whether the court action letter requires a response at this stage! Thanks

No there wasn’t. The first letter had a form asking for disclosure of the driver’s details. The second one was just threatening court action.

There was no ticket on the car and no photographic evidence on the NTK so I’m not sure what sort of carpark this is and how they have the info. Not sure what the other options are. Nonetheless we’d like to know what (if any) response to make to the notice is intended court action

No photos at all. So is she ok to ignore the letter re court action or should she write to them to say the Ntk was out of time ? The only mention is of the time the car left (not photos though) and it says she is liable for parking for the period of parking immediately before that! For all they know she just drove through the carpark!

Re NTK timing, 14 calendar days from 19/3/21 would be 2/4/21 and they wouldn't deem the letter to have arrived before the 3/4/21 according to their own assumption of 2 working days after the date on the letter (31/3/21) as there would have been no post on Good Friday (2/4/21). If the Letter is not compliant, what action should be taken? Understandably the recipient is quite worried about the latest letter and speed of escalation but she has not received any photos of her car in or leaving the car park I noticed a number of people on Trip Advisor have noted that they have been caught out with their disabled permits recently at this carpark. Sadly they seem to have paid....

For PCN's received through the post [ANPR camera capture] (must be received within 14 days from the Incident) Please answer the following questions. 1 Date of the infringement 19 March 2021 2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 31 March 2021 3 Date received According to the NTK contents it was deemed to be given on the second working day after the date on the letter - that would be 3 April 21(if Saturday is deemed a working day) as 2 and 4 April were bank holidays (Good Friday and Easter Monday) so this might already be out of time? 4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] No 5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? No 6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] No Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up N/A 7 Who is the parking company? District Enforcement Ltd 8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Burnham Beeches Lord Mayor's Drive Slough Berks For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. IAS There are two official bodies, the BPA and the IAS. If you are unsure, please check HERE If you have received any other correspondence, please mention it here Notice of Impending Court Action dated 29/4/21 received 4 May 2021

Hi, A friend with disabled parking permit visited Burnham Beeches March 2021. She parked in a disabled bay, as is her custom, displaying her blue badge. She was astonished to receive the attached Parking Charge Notice to Keeper as a first communication in the post (no ticket on car so must be a camera) and ignored it as assumed it was usual pirate private parking company behaviour. Now she has received a notice of impending court action (attached) stating that legal proceedings will commence without further notice if money not paid by 13/5/21. Looking into this it seems that many have been caught out by recent rule changes for disabled badge holders in BB that don't seem to be clear - if they had been she would have seen them and made the necessary phone call to register her car. Advice gratefully received. BB parking notice to keeper (2).pdf BB notice of court action (2).pdf

An update, just one of us has had a reply to our letters (see post #76 for text) and it deals solely with the issue of the data protection breach. It seems they were rattled enough to defend the accusation that they breached GDPR regulations. I attach a copy of the letter - sorry that it's not very clear but it says they haven't breached the regulations as they are entitled to process personal data because of the legitimate interest in recovering the unpaid parking charge. Not sure if they think using capital letters for Parking Charge (sic) makes it more official. we know it doesn't warrant any action but am posting as we thought it was interesting that they wrote this letter. AJJM Gladstones GDPR defence letter.pdf

Yes they did text her! In advice from this forum she blocked the number - it was suggested on here that they must’ve got it from social media somehow.

Update: the lawyer friend sent a very good legal letter last week The third letter will be sent over the next few days - here is the proposed text - your comments welcome as ever: Dear Will & John Letter Reference:xxxx I write with reference to your recent letter in relation to PCN numberxxxxx You threaten Court proceeding on behalf of your client yet your client’s rationale for charging me has no legal substance. An alleged parking offence as a breach of an alleged contract. I have no contract or terms and conditions with your client. Furthermore, the sum you are requesting is fictitious. I have no intention of paying any monies to your client. You had no legitimate reason to access my personal details so are already in breach of GDPR by texting me several times on my personal number which I have not given permission for you to use. Coupled with the several letters you have sent your persistence amounts to nothing short of harassment. Should this continue I will have no hesitation in contacting the ICO to report the breach. The letters I have received will be useful as tinder for the open fire in my living room now the weather has turned cold again. Should you wish to take me to court, I will be seeking full costs through a recovery order under CPR 27:14 which will come in handy now I find myself in the unenviable position of redundancy as a result of Covid. Yours Sincerely Copied to PCM UK "you don't want to be Gladstoned" Thanks AJJM

Yup, copies posted to both. Just sorry I failed to think of potentially the best line I could have used before posting - "as a urologist, I see a lot of balls but this really takes some beating"...

Ok I clearly got carried away in the excitement! My friends' letters will be posted here when complete and will be posted with the timescale suggested. Have amended my letter which, for completeness of the thread, I post here: Dear Will & John, I refer to your letter (Ref xxxxxxx) threatening court proceedings in relation to PCN number xxxxxxx I am writing to inform you that I have no intention of paying this ridiculous made-up sum of money for allegedly breaking some imaginary contract/T&Cs with your client. We all know that these are speculative invoices which you use to prey on vulnerable people who know no better. However, I’m sure that we can both agree that a judge will know better. The charge requested morphed from £100 in one letter to £160 in the next. Another blunder adding this £60 admin fee. I suggest that you look at DDJ Harvey’s judgement at Lewes County Court on 05/02/2020 (Claim number F0HM9E9Z). He was not very happy with these made-up amounts, was he? As a busy NHS employee, you can imagine that I have better and more important things to do right now than deal with your threatening letters. It is a shame that you couldn’t obtain employment that might make you feel good about yourself. Your client can either stop this foolishness now or else I look forward to receiving compensation by way of an unreasonable costs order under CPR 27.14. This payment will go a long way to funding a much-needed holiday after such a difficult year. The parking company have no authority to enforce their conditions and therefore the threats to sue are at best empty and at worst harassment and abuse. I trust that you will desist with these letters rather than waste further time, money and trees. Sincerely, xxxxxxxx COPIED TO PCM (UK) LIMITED: YOU DON’T WANT TO BE GLADSTONED! What a lovely sunny day to cycle to the post office to get my proof of posting receipt! Thanks to all

Also, I plan to include the PCN number but not the ref on their LBC. Is this correct?

Thanks, so the letter now looks like this (I added the bit in capitals in an inspired moment (!) - what do you think?): Dear Will & John, I refer to your letter threatening court proceedings in relation to PCN number….. I am writing to inform you that I have no intention of paying this ridiculous made-up sum of money for allegedly breaking some imaginary contract/T&Cs with your client. We all know that these are speculative invoices which you use to prey on vulnerable people who know no better. However, I’m sure that we can both agree that a judge will know better. The charge requested morphed from £100 in one letter to £160 in the next. Another blunder adding this £60 admin fee. I suggest that you look at DDJ Harvey’s judgement at Lewes County Court on 05/02/2020 (Claim number F0HM9E9Z). He was not very happy with these made-up amounts, was he? If you were a bona fide law firm, rather than a debt collection agency posing as one, you would know that your client has no right to demand any payment from me. YOUR PREVIOUS ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT YOU TAKE YOUR FEE FROM PCM WITHOUT DUE DILIGENCE, REGARDLESS OF THE LIKELY OUTCOME IN COURT, MEANS THAT YOU ARE SCAMMING NOT ONLY VULNERABLE INDIVIDUALS BUT ALSO PCM THEMSELVES. As a busy NHS employee, you can imagine that I have better and more important things to do right now than deal with your threatening letters. It is a shame that you couldn’t obtain employment that might make you feel good about yourself. Your client can either stop this foolishness now or else I look forward to receiving compensation by way of an unreasonable costs order under CPR 27.14. This payment will go a long way to funding a much-needed holiday after such a difficult year. The parking company have no authority to enforce their conditions and therefore the threats to sue are at best empty and at worst harassment and abuse. I trust that you will desist with these letters rather than waste further time, money and trees. Sincerely, COPIEDTO PCM (UK) LIMITED: YOU DON’T WANT TO BE GLADSTONED! I will get this posted to them and PCM later today if you think the new section is OK and I don't receive any further suggested amendments. From my reading, the letter should not have a regular signature but the name should just be typed at the bottom. Is this correct? The other letters will be posted here in due course. Huge thanks! AJJM

Ar you suggesting I delete all reference to GDPR keep a brief reference to it? How about this? Your client can either stop this foolishness now or else I look forward to receiving compensation by way of an unreasonable costs order under CPR 27.14 and under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 . This payment will go a long way to fund a much-needed holiday after such a difficult year etc

Thanks have made the relevant amendments suggested by FTMDave. Dx100uk - do you suggest I delete the following from the letter? they had no right to obtain my details (as the registered keeper) from the DVLA. Should you persist with your threats I will also apply for damages for a breach of GDPR for accessing my details without reasonable cause.

Oops sorry and thanks for that. Letter in plain text: Dear Sir/Madam, I refer to your letter threatening court proceedings in relation to PCN number….. I am writing to inform you that I have no intention of paying this ridiculous made-up sum of money for allegedly breaking some imaginary contract/T&Cs with your client. We all know that these are speculative invoices which you use to prey on vulnerable people who know no better. However, I’m sure that we can both agree that a judge will know better. The charge requested morphed from £100 in one letter to £160 in the next. Another blunder adding this £60 admin fee. I suggest that you look at DDJ Harvey’s judgement at Lewes County Court on 05/02/2020 (Claim number F0HM9E9Z). He was not very happy with these made-up amounts, was he? If you were a bona fide law firm, rather than a debt collection agency posing as one, you would know that your client has no right to demand any payment from me. As a busy NHS employee, you can imagine that I have better and more important things to do right now than deal with your threatening letters. It is a shame that you couldn’t obtain employment that might make you feel good about yourself. Your client can either stop this foolishness now or else I look forward to receiving compensation by way of an unreasonable costs order under CPR 27.14. Of course, as no charge was ever due, under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 they had no right to obtain my details (as the registered keeper) from the DVLA. Should you persist with your threats I will also apply for damages for a breach of GDPR for accessing my details without reasonable cause. This payment will go a long way to fund a much-needed holiday after such a difficult year. The parking company have no authority to enforce their conditions and therefore the threats to sue are at best empty and at worst harassment and abuse. I trust that you will desist with these letters rather than waste further time, money and trees. I look forward to receiving confirmation that you will be dropping this matter forthwith. Yours etc My 2 friends will need to personalise theirs slightly - one of them the registered keeper of the car (who wasn't the driver) is a serious lawyer so I think that will probably scare them off. The other can also hold her own! I will post anything they share with me here as there will need to be slight tweaks to each letter, although the body will remain similar. Your comments much appreciated, as always AJJM

Thanks, have been working on this today, researching and reading. Obviously, each case and relevant law is slightly different. I have looked back over the early advice I received about the particulars of this situation and am wondering if I need to see a copy of any agreement between the landowner (rather than the management co) and the parking co. Should I ask for this in this letter or is this for further down the line? I attach a first draft (not yet discussed with my 2 friends who may also have some input) in the hope that you will be able to advise. I haven't made it too rude as my husband is the registered keeper and will have to sign the letter!

Any tips?