Jump to content


TPS now BWLegal from 2014!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1743 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi all. 

 

My mother has just received the attached invoice request from BW as well as the notification from TPS. As you can see the alleged 'offence' was undertaken in 2014! A number of other online forums have indicated that TPS have just sent out a batch of these across the UK so look to be trying to clear their systems to make a quick buck.

 

This is the first correspondence she has had with them so surely this contravenes POFA in terms of notification timescales in the first instance.

In terms of next steps should she just ignore for the moment as it would seem that TPS/BW are chancing their arm?

 

Cheers!

 

DDW

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

please complete this:

 

if you must put stuff up please use PDF not post img's to a post.

 

has she moved since parking there?

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok. Thanks dx. Have filled in and attached accordingly. DDW

 

For a windscreen ticket (Notice To Driver) please answer the following questions....

 

1 The date of infringement? 01/10/2014.

 

2 Have you yet appealed to the parking company yet? No as attached letter is first correspondence from TPS/BWLegal.

 

Have you received a Notice To Keeper? (NTK) [must be received by you between 29-56 days]

what date is on it No (As above. Attached letter is first contact from TPS/BWLegal)

Did the NTK provide photographic evidence? Have not received NTK or any other evidence apart from attached letter(s).

 

3 Did the NTK mention Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) No as did not receive NTK.

 

4 If you appealed after receiving the NTK,

did the parking company give you any information regarding the further appeals process?

[it is well known that parking companies will reject any appeal whatever the circumstances] N/A

 

5 Who is the parking company? Total Parking Solutions.

 

6. where exactly [Carpark name and town] did you park? B&Q, Neath, Neath Port-Talbot.   B&Q have subsequently moved out of this location. Unsure if TPS still manage site.

PCN.pdf

 

No, she still lives at the same address btw. Cheers, DDW

Link to post
Share on other sites

well no such rule as leaving the site.

they cant keep you there

pers i'd ignore this until/unless you get a letter of claim.

 

so she remembers getting a windscreen ticket?

I doubt it

they don't issue PCN windscreen tickets for that I don't think

will be CCTV capture I bet

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi dx.  Thanks for your response- much appreciated.

 

Just as I thought...no such rule and cant keep you there!

 

She received nothing (no initial windscreen ticket, NTK or anything else) prior to these letters.

If she had received any threatograms or invoices I would have definitely raised on this great site at the time so am very sure of that.

 

I am unsure about CCTV but 100% sure that there was (and still is) no ANPR cameras on that particular site.

With that in mind, (and as this is her first notification) this must surely out of time in terms of POFA.

 

Wouldn't that alone be enough to beat TPS if they do gown down the claims route?

And of course will ignore in any case unless they do. 😀

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a quick question, as this was 2014, does your mother still own the  same car as  mentioned in the Invoice?   Did she buy it after that date.   Just checking that TPS havent done a recent DVLA check and  a possible previous keeper had the Invoice originally.  If so GDPR breach alert.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that what brassnecked was asking in the above post, was your mother the registered owner of the vehicle at the time of the alleged offence in 2014. Not that it makes much difference to the recommendations to ignore until a letter before claim is received, it is asked to rationalize the fact that no previous correspondence has been received.

My time as a Police Officer and subsequently time working within the Motor Trade gives me certain insights into the problems that consumers may encounter.

I have no legal qualifications.

If you have found my post helpful, please enhance my reputation by clicking on the Heart. Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Gick. 

Thank you for your response.

Yes, she was the RO of the car at the time in 2014 but definitely received no correspondence until now.

Cheers, DDW

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes thanks Gick, that was the reasoning there, just to make sure there is no chance of any backdoor CCJ or that they have tried it on with a previous keeper's invoice being that the alleged infringement was 5 years ago.  PPC's and BW aren't exactly squeaky always.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It really is time that BW legal got a real kicking. They are totally useless. You would think that they would know that the registered keeper and the driver can often be two different people. Therefore they cannot demand the extra 54 pounds since that would only be contractually due  [if indeed there was a contract anyway] by the driver as per POFA.

 

Further is it disingenuous to infer that even if she did lose in Court [highly unlikely with BW legal in charge] that as long as the debt is settled within 30 days a ccj will not be issued.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully an acidic letter to BW legal will send them back under their rock if they did send a Letter bfeore claim, shame the courts don't check the numerous dodgy POC's that include the Unicorn Food tax in a claim that tries to  sue keeper..

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is likely that they are hoping that you wet your pants upon the receipt of a threatogram from a company of solicitors.

I would be tempted to ignore this and see what they want to do next and if it is a LBA then you respond with a reminder that VCS v Ibbotson is the persuasive case here

 

it is unlikely that their clients have the authority of the ICO to go round spying on people's movements and put it to "strict proof" that they do have this authority from the landlord and the ICO

 

that anyone observed leaving the site was contractually obliged to remain there as it would only apply to the driver at the time if in a parallel universe such a clause was enforceable as the keeper wasnt the driver at the time so why are they wasting their time writing now?

 

your mother ought to get on to the DVLA to find out who accessed her keeper details and when.

The DVLA try and avoid telling people the answer because they collude in fraud but don't want to admit their own money grubbing allows other to break the law with impunity

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks lookinforinfo.

BW seem to be quite active at the moment as are TPS sending many old invoices out across the UK. As you state above there are immediate discrepancies and issues...

It seems they (along with most others) try the extra 'legal fees' charge en masse.

 

Thanks again brassnecked.

 

Just waiting for the LBC. My mother has already had 2 text messages from BW wanted her to ring them to discuss a 'personal matter'. Suitably ignored of course.

 

Thanks ericsbrother.

 

Just playing the waiting game now....

In terms of getting in touch with the DVLA,  is this simply an SAR to them with £10 to cover costs?

 

Cheers, DDW

Link to post
Share on other sites

No just write.

no need to sar..ps which is free now anyway

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

just a metter of finding the right department as the DVLA has a dozen differetn poscodes for the same building.

Have a look at Karalius' thread about CEL in east London, he got a response so it will have the details of the correct section to write to.

 

She needs to simply ask who accessed her datails, when and for what stated reason.

The last but may well give her ammunition for suing them for breach of the DPA cos they are likey to had told a lie to get the access ( ie they know that Ibbotson determination gives them no "reasonable cause")

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

 

Thanks dx and eb- much appreciated. Have written to the DVLA so just waiting for a response. Hopefully they will have 'slipped up' here. Ibbotson certainly makes very interesting reading too!

 

In terms of an update, BW have text my mother 3 times and have now sent a lovely follow up threatogram (attached).

 

I've also undertaken some research on the former B&Q parking site in question.

 

The site is now run by G24 Parking, has new signage and ANPR installed also.

 

I'm going to dig around further in the meantime to determine if TPS had initial authority from the landowner and permission to erect their signage back in 2014.

 

Let's see what I can find! Cheers, DDW

 

PCN2.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

the fact they were booted out may well be the reason they are chasing this at a late stage, nothing to lose as far as they are concerned.

WRONG.

 

you check with the council about planning consent for signage and equipment like cameras etc. 2 different laws so 2 permissions needed.

also get pictures of what is there now so you can challenge the veracity of what they say about signs etc as a new parking co with shiny new signs can indicate that they were doing it wrong, not enough or clear enough signs or whatever you want to push with this and they cant say that their sub,ission canbe proved.

 

CEL used to jusy use a computer mock up of sigsn and claim they were just like that in any car aprk when the real photographs showed anything but. throw doubt on one bit of thei claim or evidence and the judge will disregad the whole lot as unreliable. that m3eans you ahve to o the research though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks eb! 

 

I have an update....

DVLA letter sent asking for data requests.

 

Have also been in touch with the council planning department and spoke to a lovely lady who totally sympathised as she had recently been caught up with something similar and was very happy to help!

 

I have a telephone call scheduled with her next Monday to confirm if permissions were actually needed by the council

(she couldn't confirm this when I spoke to her but would research for me in terms of private land ownership).

 

In the meantime I checked the planning app portal and can confirm that the council has received no planning for signage or cameras etc from TPS and/or B and Q themselves (there doesn't seem to be planning apps from they new PPC either!).

 

Have attached evidence of this dating back to the mid 1990's.

The only planning permission given has been for security fencing!

 

I have also attached Google Map shots of the site.

I could not go into the car park any further as Maps changes the view to 2016.

 

The photo evidence is from 2011 (none exists for 2014 unfortunately).

 

Looks like there are parking signs as such in those views but when you zoom in they are illegible

- the best I could get are also in the attached.

 

Regards, DDW

BandQsignage.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

you get pictures of the current lot and use these against them.

 

The whole point of this is to show that no-one can prove what they are claiming and you can prove that it isnt so now.

 

they will try and show a mock up and you can then challenge this by saying whwere is the real evidence that you had 22 signs all a mile high by showing actual photographs where the background is indisputably that site?

 

So for the second time of asking get the pictures of what is there

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hello, 

 

I have just stumbled across this thread after receiving a PCN, from the same location and also from 2014!

 

I have received 1 letter which i ignored but today received a final warning letter before county court proceedings.

 

Do you have any updates on how the claim is going? any information you can share would be greatly appreciated. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

best to create a topic of your own please

this one is for advising SSwales.

click create in the top red banner

 

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...