NCP ANPR PCN - Crawley Kingsgate - paid but ticket thrown - NTK out of time away since

[FTMDave]

Surely both can be done?

 

Send them the insulting letter which also takes the wee wee out of them about the £60 charge?  

[dx100uk]

that part is for NCP, not their dogs, NCP added it not their minions..?

[Summersea]

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.

 

 

Edited May 2, 2019 by Summersea

[brassnecked]

Something like this, but doubtless ericsbrother will look in and indicate something better:

 

Dear BWL  NCP, As you are speculating chancers, and know as I know there is no Keeper  liability in this matter as your Notice To Keeper is out of time, so is not POFA Compliant therefore not actionable, you have also added a £60 Unicorn Food tax which is not applicable mthe Keeper cannot be made responsible for this spurious unlawful charge. .  As there is no cause for action I will be contacting the ICO  for breach of GDPR for your unlawful processing of my data.

 

You get the idea? let them know that you know they have no cause of action and their Roboclaim POC will be robustly challenged.

[ericsbrother]

I would be happy to send that, you could also let them know that it is a 2 way street:

 

Dear BWL,

as you are the private parking world's second best solicitors you will know all about keeper liability because you have been copying Will and John's homework and thus know that none exists in this case and they have no cause for action.

 

You will therefore also know that your client has unlawfully processed my data and that you are obliged to dob them in to the ICO for the same.

 

If you do manage to persuade your client to waste money on a spurious claim that is doomed to fail I will be minded to take civil action against them and seek damages as per VCS v Phillip (Liverpool CC dec 2016).

 

If you want to save them some money and act in their best interests just send me a cheque for £250 now and I will call it quits.

[Summersea]

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)).

[ericsbrother]

 factual but too polite.

Dont forget, they are lawyers and know what they are doing even if they look incompetent.

Dont show them all your cards at this time, if they do sue you it will be a certainly that their story will have changed to fit in with the new situation so for the moment stick with the insult rather than detail.

[Summersea]

 

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. 

[ericsbrother]

I was referring to the addition.

 

 you do what you think best for you but experience shows that being right is less likely to stop them in their tracks than being right and insulting them.

 

reason is if they go to court you can use your letter as evidence that you did correspond to try and avoid a civil suit but they are clearly unreasonable because you have made it clear they have no cause for action and the judges will be well aware of the reputation of the solicitors sent boils down to whether the client wants to look like they have employed idiots to prosecute their case.

 

. It is their client who pays so a short rebuff copied to the client will have more of an effect than a treatise on say planning law or the GDPR because we they think that they can bluff their way through court and will persuade the client to try their luck as they know what you have got to say or that you aren't serious about a counterclaim because it is clear you are a decent person etc.

 

Sometimes being irrational and unreasonable ( careful how though) gets you results beyond what being measured will ever do.

 

[brassnecked]

Ericsbrother's method is better in this type of situation, short insulting dismissal of their claim; less is more here.

[Summersea]

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).

[FTMDave]

11 hours ago, Summersea said:

I think if I just send an insulting letter it is more likely to go to court. 

 

But why do you think that?

 

By insulting them you are showing that you know their "case" is complete pants, that they'd lose in court, that you're not scared of them, that you hold them in contempt and that you'd have no problem doing court.  

 

It's people who treat them with respect who they think are the mugs and they're more likely to take to court, hoping the person will be scared of court or think their carp case actually holds water.

 

No guarantees of course, but EB's classics have shut these fleecers up many a time.

[Summersea]

18 hours ago, Summersea said:

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).

So is this insulting enough?

[ericsbrother]

you send what you are comfortable with but bear in mind they already know what you are telling them, they are hoping that you dont.

My view is they dont deserve any respect because they are not honest brokers and if the MoJ had any gumption there would be more solicitors in jail.

[Summersea]

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?

[honeybee13]

I wouldn't reply, Summersea, you don't want to stir things up unless the forum gurus say otherwise.

 

HB

[dx100uk]

Ignore

[ericsbrother]

you NEVER sned them a nice letter and you dont  do anything that isnt a response to somwething they have done.

They will either drop this or sue you and writing nice letters make the latter more likely because they will see that you wnat to respove this quickly and the only way they want to end the mater is with money in their pocket.

What they will never do is write to you and say they and their client are wrong and to think they might do so is going off into the world of fantasy.

I suggest that you keep all of your paperwork safe and stop thinking you need to dance to their tune. If yu want to sue them for breach of the GDPR then  do so but do that as a separate action