BW letter re VCS PCN parking in valley centertainment but back in 2010

[Najo]

Hi i'm new to this site

 

I received the same letter today for parking in valley centertainment but back in 2010!

 

I initially ignored the letters that were sent and had not heard anything since until

 

today a letter from vcs and bw legal stating the same as Mantaray thread.

 

What should i do?

Ignore or respond?

 

I cant even remember what it was for i think for parking somewhere in the car park that wasnt within the lines.

 

I have read somewhere that it should be ignored until i receive a letter before action?

What is that?

 

I heard that these companies cant afford to take people to court?

Is this correct?

 

In a bit of a panic now as its popped up 6 years later?

Help appreciated please.

Thanks

[silverfox1961]

Hi and welcome to CAG. As this pretend invoice was before 2012 when PoFA came into being, only the driver is responsible so if they ever tried this in court (doubt it) how could anyone say with 100% certainty that you were driving. You may be the keeper but were you the driver? Of course you cannot remember.

 

A letter before action is where a company tries again before starting court action. These companies hope you are not aware of PoFA and that you will cough up before they do anything else.

 

I suspect nothing will come of it but on the off chance that it does, have a read round this forum and then start a new thread.

[Najo]

So i should just ignore for now until i recieve a letter before action letter? Thankyou for your help.

[dx100uk]

own thread created.

 

 

pers i'd send the one line denial letter

in many vcs/excel/BW threads here.

 

 

even though it could be statute barred now?

 

 

when was the speculative invoice issued according to the BW letter?

[Najo]

Thanks.

 

 

The date of contravention on the current letter from bw legal is dated 14 December 2010.

 

 

Balance due is £174. "£120 PCN charge plus clients initial legal costs of £54 ehich are detialed in the car park terms and conditions."

 

Contracention description is parked in a restricted area of the car park.

[Najo]

So if i ignore it after december this year they cant claim anything as its been over 6 years?

[Najo]

" I do not acknowledge any debt to you or you client "

 

 

Is this the one liner that should be sent to them?

 

 

If i ignore it and dont send them anything

does that mean they have a chance of winning as its an undefended claim?

I read that in another thread?

 

 

I have not been the registered keeper of the vehicle for nearly a year now.

So should i write back and also say i do not own the vehicle

and did not receive any letters and this is the first letter i have received,

 

 

i do not know who was driving the vehicle at that time or what the offence is for can you provide some evidence that it was me driving the vehicle?

 

 

So confused, is it better to reply or better to ignore for now?

 

 

Bopefully if the statute barred is something to consider

then they should be able to write to me after 14 decmeber this year anyway??

[dx100uk]

write back

that letter is a bit too brief!!

 

that will serve two purposes

 

one inform them of your new address

 

two. nail your colours to your flag.

 

pers I would reply.

from what we can bather

BW are more likely to send a court claim to total ignore followers

[Najo]

What about tthe statute barred you mentioned?

 

 

Theres only 4 months left.. i dont understand why after 6 years they have now decided to try their luck again!

[dx100uk]

you need to gain a complete picture here.

 

 

BW have issued prob 10'000's of these letters

they will issue a claimform if you ignore them.

4mts is no protection.

 

 

dx

[Najo]

Is there anything you suggest i should add to my reply back to them apart feom the one liner?

 

As the current letter states they will talk to their client about start court proceedings should i ignore this letter ant wait for the next one before replying?

 

Thanks

[Najo]

Also what doesnit mean to be before the PoFa 2012? Is that something that will be in my favour?

[dx100uk]

post 2

[zydeco]

wow! they really are scraping the barrel, 2010?? pre POFA means they can only claim off the driver of the vehicle who they don't know so they hope you don't know the rules.

POFA 2012 gave the parking gangsters the right to claim off the registered keeper of the vehicle as long as they conformed to certain rules.

Before that date they have no legal right to access the dvla for keeper details.

[silverfox1961]

PoFA is the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012

The relevant sections are in this pdf

Guidance on Section 56 and Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012: Recovery of Unpaid Parking Charges - guidance-unpaid-parking-charges.pdf

 

So long as you don't name the driver as you cannot recall who was driving 5 years and 8 months ago then there is nothing they can do. this is just a fishing exercise to try and get some pocket money.

If any of these new letters mention PoFA or the Beavis case, don't worry about them either as your case is from well before this time. If they were STUPID enough to try it on in court and then they mention PoFA, this is inadmissible as evidence. In short, ignore

[Oddfellow]

Can someone more experienced in these matters than I am tell me how on earth they hope to win from this sort of claim? Are they relying purely on people's lack of knowledge of the law???

[silverfox1961]

Can someone more experienced in these matters than I am tell me how on earth they hope to win from this sort of claim? Are they relying purely on people's lack of knowledge of the law???

Yup!

[ericsbrother]

they have always had the right to access the keeper details of a vehicle

but there was never a liability that could be placed or transferred to the keeper

so they had to PROVE who the driver was at the time.

 

 

Now, with parking tickets you get from the council they have 6 months to issue

because it is then taken that the keeper wont remember who was driving at the time

and the council then lose that keeper liability.

 

 

The PoFA places much tighter timescales, namely a fortnight for ANPR capture.

 

I wouldnt ignore

but send a reply saying that

 

 

"there is no keeper liability for this event as it predates the POFA so any claim against the keeper will be treated as being vexatious".

 

 

You should make sure they know your current address so they dont try and sneak a claim in at any previous one and win by default.

 

 

BTW, the claim for £54 costs is also a recent confection and would fail miserably for an event of this age even if the rest of the claim was good.

[Najo]

Thanks for all your help.

Ii think for now in going to ignore this letter until i receive the next one and then reply with the above.

 

 

As theres only 4 months left to hit the 6 year anniversary

 

 

im going to try and pro long it for as long as possible,

 

 

after that date they cant pursue with a CCJ anyway?

[Oddfellow]

Bear in mind they might try! After all, they've already tried to ignore the fact that they have no right in law to pursue you as the vehicle's keeper, as the alleged incident occurred pre-POFA2012!

[Najo]

Thanks, they most probably will try but with the statute barred i have more of an argument against them.

[Oddfellow]

I would have thought that if they choose to issue court proceedings against you before the 6 years have expired, their claim would not be statute-barred. If you continue to bury your head in the sand, they could get a default judgment against you.

[Najo]

Hmm, should i wait for the mext letter from them before i reply then? I'm just trying to buy some more time and hoping if they have issued anything by then, then after december they cant do a CCJ against me?

[ericsbrother]

no send the denial letter. They are suing about 1000 people a week and we wont be pleased to have to help prepare a defence when you could have seen this off without a fight.

[Najo]

is this draft letter ok, found a template online? should i add/change or missed anything else out? should i say that this is the first letter i have received and i would like to see all previous evidence/correspondence sent as well as evidence of the driver?

 

Dear Sir,

 

Thankyou for your letter dated xxx

 

I deny any debt to Vehicle Control Service. I was not the driver, as the alleged parking event was before The protection of Freedoms Act, your client has no right to pursue me for payment.

 

The matter is therefore closed and the Data protection Act requires that your client deletes my records.

 

As an aside, the Civil Procedure Rules are quite clear that your £54 charge for 'Legal Services' cannot be recovered in the Small Claims Court.

 

Yours Faithfully