BW Legal letter old VCS PCN at hartlepool marina 2015

[GillyC]

Hello,

I have received a letter from BW Legal regarding a PCN notice from May 2015 for "parking with out a valid ticket'

 

The letter states that i have 14 days to either pay the bill in full which is now £154 including there costs and fees OR detail grounds for a dispute.

 

If payment or dispute aren't received by 20/05/2016 they are claiming the possibility of county court proceedings which could lead to and estimated total £236.52 in fees and costs

 

The letter also mentions the ParkingEye LTD V Beavis case and that if my claim has been to the IAS and appeal rejected the court will more than likely find the same.

 

I have never replied to any letter received regarding the PCN or had any contact with the company issuing the PCN or the threading letters.

 

I am wondering if i am getting the point where i need to act?

But I'm a little confused with all the info on the forum and the different scenarios people are in?

 

can anybody help or point me in the right direction,

 

Thanks Chris

[dx100uk]

loads of like thread here

 

 

https://cse.google.co.uk/cse?cx=partner-pub-0964707606882478:652l7hswbgv&ie=UTF-8&q=BW+VCS&sa=Search+CAG#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=BW%20VCS&gsc.page=1

[Homer67]

Firstly do not panic. This is the next stage of their begging letters and you only need to act if you get a Letter Before Action. If you contact them now they will know they have a live one and pursue it further, this is from 12 months ago - if they thought they had a chance they would have done it by now.

[GillyC]

Thanks. Thats the advice i have taken up to now is not to contact them but i work away and am getting worried if they send me a letter before action and i miss the deadline. Ill hang tough. I absolutely detest unfair cost and companies trying it on.

[ericsbrother]

VCS do not rely on the PoFA and therefore cannot claim keeper liability in any action.

This means that to have a successful claim against you they must show that you were driving at the time of the alleged event and that you breached a contrafct you freely entered into.

 

 

VCS can rarely show a cause of action so will generally avoid a court claim

unless they think they will win by default or scare you into paying up some inflated amount by issuing one.

 

Tell us where and when the alleged event occurred

and we can advise as to whether it is worth sending a "prove it" letter to head off a possible claim.

[GillyC]

The PCN was issued in a large open car park at hartlepool marina, wardens walk about and check cars, they couldn't tell who was the driver.

[ericsbrother]

OK,

first thing to note is the leap in the amount claimed from somewhere between £60 and £100 for the breach of contract and £154 including their fees.

 

 

If you enetered a contract and you owed say £100 for failure to perform to that contract why are they claiming another £54?

 

 

Hopefully you will realise that this extra amount isnt part of any agreement and is just made up to earn the debt collectors a few quid by relying on ignorance.

 

 

They always keep it realistic or people would start to question it but there is no lawful reason for adding this to the debt.

 

 

BW legal may be solicitors but they are acting as debt collectors so dont have any right to claim that they can do this or that and no costs can be added that are not part of a legal action and they havent started one.

 

However,

to follow on from that you could send them a letter saying that "the keeper of the vehicle reg xx00yyy demands strict proof of the alleged debt,

including copies of the notice to driver,

evidence of the identity of the driver

 

 

as VCS do not rely on the POFA so they cannot claim keeper liability and an explanation of why the amount claimed can exceed the contractual amount so to this end a copy of the credit agreement signed by the parties who entered the contract.

 

 

The keeper denies that there is a debt or any action leading to such a claim and thus states there is no cause for action and suggests you inform your client of this and unless they can produce the evidence requested they cease further communication or risk a complaint of harassment as both a criminal offence and civil tort ".

 

If you can post a picture of the signage there it would be helpful, they rarely get that right so no contract could ever be formed based on it.

[GillyC]

Ill get some pictures of the signage today but I'm unsure whether they have been changed/amended since the PCN was issued.

 

Who would i send the letter to? VCS or BW Legal?

[ericsbrother]

The above to BW legal, it is just to create a paper trail should they think you dont love them enough to write. They will then know that you are not ignoring them, just treating them with justified contempt.

[GillyC]

I'm unable to post photos but have taken them of the signage

Edited May 10, 2016 by GillyC

[dx100uk]

upload

[GillyC]

find pic attached

IMG_2387.pdf

[ericsbrother]

Well, an interesting mangling of what the contract is or might be.

For example you are paying £100 for breaching the conditions of the contract

but then they say the parking charge is £100 per day.

That means there should be a ticket tariff on the machine that only dispenses you a ticket

if you shove 100 pounds into the machine and who would do that?.

 

The top line of the sign says T&C'sapply and then lists some

but has loads of other words on the sign that are not the T&C's and all in different colours and font sizes.

 

 

The contract is followed by the words IF a ticket is required- so it is not compulsory but voluntary then?

Again they refer to other terms not on the sign

and say that you must pay them if you breach the conditions printed on the "fine" tickets

- how the hell are you supposed to know what they say without a specimen ticket?

 

Plenty to argue about without ever going near their right to enter into contracts

or the legality of the signage being there anyway.

 

It will be interesting to see how they respond to your demand for "strict proof" of the breach,

generally these are laughable as they dont understand what is required.

[Fox247]

I think you will also find that this car park is covered by Tees &Hartlepool byelaws and is not relevant land for POFA. Keeper liability cannot apply.

[armadillo71]

I think you will also find that this car park is covered by Tees &Hartlepool byelaws and is not relevant land for POFA. Keeper liability cannot apply.

 

Can you post them up please because I can't seem to find them?

 

As already stated though, VCS do not claim to use Schedule 4,but assume the RK was the driver.

 

find pic attached

 

Can you post up a pic of the tariff signage as well please. Is it the same as the out dated google Street veiw? £3 all day parking?

[ericsbrother]

If it is old port and harbour byelaws I bet the maximum fine for unloading coal or fish in the wrong time is twenty shillings or some such sum set back in the 1870's. I've seen parking co's and harbour boards come unseated over things like that.

[Fox247]

Part 3 Section 21 deals with parking and there is no mention of a licence to a third party (VCS) to carry out parking management. The port authority may be operating outside the remit of the

 

byelawslegislation.gov.uk/ukla/1966/25/pdfs/ukla_19660025_en.pdf

Copy this link to view in browser.

[armadillo71]

Part 3 Section 21 deals with parking and there is no mention of a licence to a third party (VCS) to carry out parking management. The port authority may be operating outside the remit of the

 

byelawslegislation.gov.uk/ukla/1966/25/pdfs/ukla_19660025_en.pdf

Copy this link to view in browser.

 

Thank you.

[Fox247]

Although VCS don't claim keeper liability they assume the driver was the keeper

(in most cases they are less than 50% correct).

 

 

However as this land is not relevent for POFA 2012 they have a double hurdle to jump if they try court.

 

 

It's like Liverpool JLA airport where no defended case have come to court

and if it did they would pull out on the court steps.

 

BW legal though are acting a debt collectors but might be inexperienced or just unaware that this is not relevant land

and try to move it further on.

 

 

VCS do do court but in less difficult more straightforward cases.

 

The important thing here is under no circumstances give a hint who was driving.

[armadillo71]

Although VCS don't claim keeper liability they assume the driver was the keeper

(in most cases they are less than 50% correct).

 

 

However as this land is not relevent for POFA 2012 they have a double hurdle to jump if they try court.

 

 

It's like Liverpool JLA airport where no defended case have come to court

and if it did they would pull out on the court steps.

 

BW legal though are acting a debt collectors but might be inexperienced or just unaware that this is not relevant land

and try to move it further on.

 

 

VCS do do court but in less difficult more straightforward cases.

 

The important thing here is under no circumstances give a hint who was driving.

 

(in most cases they are less than 50% correct).

 

Can you explain what you mean please?

 

Do you have the Doncaster airport byelaws?

 

Peel Holdings, dodgy as f@% £.....

 

http://www.salfordstar.com/article.asp?id=1761

[ericsbrother]

the thing about land that is covered by its own byelaws

is apart from not being "relevant land" so any of the protocols of the PoFA cannot be used to create a liability by anone,

not just keeper is that there can never be an assignment to a third party.

 

BW legal are not inexperianced at this, quite the reverse,

they are deemed experts on private parking law but they are paid to sing a particular song

and tout themselves for that purpose.

 

 

They know their client is absolutely wrong but they both hope you dont know that as there is no money to be had by applying the byelaws

[Fox247]

(in most cases they are less than 50% correct).

 

Can you explain what you mean please?

 

Do you have the Doncaster airport byelaws?

 

Peel Holdings, dodgy as f@% £.....

 

 

For their own purposes and incorrectly VCS assume the name of and address given by DVLA is the driver.

However the driver can be anyone mentioned on the insurance certificate (hopefully!).

 

 

The signage at the site clearly states their contract is with driver only so if VCS don't know who it is, tough!

That's why the driver or keeper should never own up by inferring or stating who the driver was.

So many people make this very mistake by phoning the PPC and not awaiting the NTK.

 

Sorry I don’t have Doncaster Airport byelaws but search this forum, MSE and Pepipoo and I’m sure they will come up.

 

Peel Holdings are in business to make money which I’m certain they are very good at

and probably care very little how they make it.

 

 

Unfortunately the only answer is to avoid any of their sites or be very vigilant.

I always use a dash-cam and when leaving a private car park save the file.

I have recovered the cost very soon on because PPC’s use any trick in the book to get your money.

[armadillo71]

For their own purposes and incorrectly VCS assume the name of and address given by DVLA is the driver. However the driver can be anyone mentioned on the insurance certificate (hopefully!). The signage at the site clearly states their contract is with driver only so if VCS don't know who it is, tough! That's why the driver or keeper should never own up by inferring or stating who the driver was. So many people make this very mistake by phoning the PPC and not awaiting the NTK.

 

Sorry I don’t have Doncaster Airport byelaws but search this forum, MSE and Pepipoo and I’m sure they will come up.

 

Peel Holdings are in business to make money which I’m certain they are very good at and probably care very little how they make it. Unfortunately the only answer is to avoid any of their sites or be very vigilant. I always use a dash-cam and when leaving a private car park save the file. I have recovered the cost very soon on because PPC’s use any trick in the book to get your money.

 

Right,I thought you had something new about VCS....

 

Your '(in most cases they are less than 50% correct). ' statement was you just guessing at how many RKs are driving when a parking charge notice is received!?

 

Unless someone has a saved copy of Doncaster airport byelaws, then you cannot get hold of them online. Although there was a poster who worked there I seem to recall, who I asked to get a copy, but he never returned...

[armadillo71]

Not wanting to hijack thread but ;

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?454450-Another-Robin-Hood-Airport-VCS-charge-notice.

[odds]

For their own purposes and incorrectly VCS assume the name of and address given by DVLA is the driver.

However the driver can be anyone mentioned on the insurance certificate (hopefully!).

 

 

The driver doesn't have to be on the insurance certificate.

Most comprehensive policies will allow you to drive other vehicles with the owners consent

, although in most cases only cover you on a 3rd Party only basis with restrictions.

 

Therefore the driver could be any number of people known to the owner/keeper

who could have borrowed the car and be covered by their own insurance.