Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This is a draft of my WS   By no means final   Negatives:   doesnt follow smoothly    long winded   not much referene to cases except Beavis     I have tried to attach appendied but failed miserably, but I may not need them   The appendix are essentially:    IPC COP example of a contract between landowner and a PPC   IPC COP re entrance signages   IPC COD re sanctions on members who dont comply   JPEG of the erected signage showing that its back is to the entrance of the car park hence not in immediate view   JPEG of a receipt from 16.1.2021 ( yesterday) proving I went there and had a look at the signages     Not really sure if the appendices will make much difference en my defence   Please make any constructive comments etc..   I will have a look at the many links  FTM Dave kindly provided. I havent in detail because bene typing for the last 7 hours      Anyhow Thanks All             WS redacted-merged.pdf
    • Thanks DX 100   haha i totally  agree with your comment about the page 20    Yes I am awake and been all night w my WS   BUT can I point this very very very impt point please, which I am not sure if it has come to your attention   1. The payment machine and 6 hours and the free parking after 4.30 pm on a Saturday etc....all taken on board.   HOWEVER, and I cant stop myself laughing, this pay machine  he eludes to is based at The Market Shopping Centre Car park , after googling it is in CREWE.  It is not even relevant. They have put in a signage that is not even at the Merry Hill Centre which is in the West Midlands.    The Merry Hill Centre is the one I went to in Dudley, west midlands. All the signages , apart from the one you elude to have the intu Merry Hill logo     The one you refer to is in Crewe. I have never been to Crewe in my life lol so that signage is totally irrelevant    we can play this either way:   1. can take up your line of argument regarding the 6 hours etc. and pretned we are also using the pay machine    OR     2. totally dismiss it as being irrelevant, misleading , wasting the time of everyone by providing irrelevant info. Thats what I have argued in my WS so far. That signage does not belong to inTu Merry Hill            This is akin to someone being on annual leave from work between say 1.10 .2020 and 1.11.2020, and then finding out one of his/her collogues saying,  I saw you leaving work early last week , the 15th of October 2020.   hello !!!, I wasnt even in the country on the 15th of October 2020 !!   essentially thats what the claimant has done . The signage on page 20 doesnt even belong to the shopping centre I went to   I will log out and carry on with th WS     Thanks again       .   
    • Thank you FTMDave. As you can see from the time now I have had a nightmare getting questionnaire answered due to scanner problems, it is up there now though. I do not have proof of breakdown as the alternator was bought from a breakers yard near Chelmsford. I remember it well as they sold me the wrong one on the Saturday and I had to go back in my mechanic friends vehicle on Sunday as I had broken the original alternator getting it off.
    • 1 The date of infringement? 19/12/2019   2 Have you yet appealed to the parking company yet? [Y/N?] No. I did, unfortunately use the MyParkingCharge.co.uk portal to deny liability as the keeper and deny any contract. I mistakenly thought this was where I made a SAR. (I now see looking at the site again that it is actually. https://excel.zatappeal.com ) This was replied to as if it were an appeal.   if you have then please post up whatever you sent and how you sent it and the date you sent it, suitably redacted. [as a PDF- follow the upload guide]   has there been a response? yes please AS A PDFFILE  ONLY ..post it up as well, suitably redacted. - follow the upload guide]   If you haven't appealed yet - ,.........DONT ! seek advice on your topic first.   have you received a Notice To Keeper? (NTK) [must be received by you between 29-56 days] Yes. Issue date indicates that if "contravention" date is day 1 then NTK was issued on day 15 so arrived well before day 29. Document received was PCN/NTK in one. (see pdf)   what date is on it Issue date is 02/01/2020   Did the NTK provide photographic evidence? Yes   [scan up BOTHSIDES to ONE PDF of the PCN and your NTK - follow the upload guide]   3 Did the NTK mention Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) [Y/N?] NO   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] Suggested appeals could be made via IAS   5 Who is the parking company? VCS   6. where exactly [Carpark name and town] did you park? Broke down on service road of Southend Airport, Southend-On-Sea   please do not put JPG Picture files into your post   .............................   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 19/12/2019     2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 02/01/2020.   I recall noting, when it arrived on Saturday 16th Jan 2020 that this was more than 14 days from "offence" date.   [scan up BOTHSIDES as ONE PDF- follow the upload guide] please do not put JPG Picture files into your post   3 Date received 16/01/20   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? Yes   6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] Not as such. See this entry for PCN above.   Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up As above.   7 Who is the parking company? VCS   8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Broke down on service road of Southend Airport, Southend-On-Sea   For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. Initial appeal to be via www.myparkingcharge.co.uk then via 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 I have subsequently received a Demand for Payment dated 28/02/2020.  outstanding balance £160 Final Demand posted on 16/03/2020         outstanding balance £160 LBC dated 27/03/2020.                                 outstanding balance £160 with estimate of court fees £25 2nd LBC from ELMS legal dated 30/10/2020 listing estimated fees of   Principal debt £160                                                                                                                        Estimated interest £12                                                                                                   Estimated court / hearing fees £50                                                                                                          Estimated solicitors' costs £50                                                                                                                              Estimated total £272   windscreen or ANPR section to your thread and answer the questions... …….... in either case scan up bothsides of any letters/tickets in or appeals made out to ONE MULTIPAGE PDF ONLY please do not put JPG Picture files into your post   NTK plus .pdf
    • Have done the email address thing. The order specifically states just the applicant ?
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

NCP/BW ANPR PCN Claim Form - Lincoln Brayford Street Lincoln LN5 7BJ


Recommended Posts

Good Afternoon guys!

 

Name of the Claimant: National Car Parks Limited

 

Claimants Solicitors: BW Legal

 

Date of issue: 27th October 2020

 

Date for AOS: 5th November (AOS was completed on 10th November)

 

Date to submit Defence: 29th November (This is a Sunday so: 27th November)

 

What is the claim for: 

1.The Claim is for the sum of £189 being the contractual charge due from the Defendant in respect of a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) for a contractual breach which occurred on 05/11/2018 in the private car park/land at Lincoln Brayford Street Lincoln LN5 7BJ in relation to a ******** registration mark *** ****.

 

2.The PCN was issued as the Defendant failed to comply with the terms and conditions, as displayed.

 

3.Despite demands, the charge remains unpaid.

 

The Claim also includes Statutory Interest pursuant to section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum (a daily rate of £O.04) from 05/11/2018 to 26/10/2020 being an amount of 29.

 

The Claim also includes £60.00 recovery costs as set out in the Terms and Conditions and in the ATA AoS Code of Practice."

 

 

What is the value of the claim?

 

Amount Claimed: £189

Court Fees:  £25

Legal Rep Fees: £50

Total Amount: £264

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A little more information from me:

 

This alleged offense occurred two years ago and the vehicle in question was a hire car, hired by my small company.

I'm genuinely unable to recall the event.

 

I did drive that particular vehicle most of the time.

I do not recall if I informed them I was driver at that point (I may have done to avoid damaging the company as these sorts of letters fall on my desk) or if the hire company informed them that I was the named driver. 

 

I realise that I've left it quite late to do my defence, I've been reading the forums and pondering what to put for some time.

I feel like a defence of "I don't know" sounds ridiculous but I also would rather take my chances playing their game and potentially ending up in court.

 

I cannot imagine they would want to get to that point for the expenses they will incur for £264 or less.

Happy to be corrected on this if wrong? 

 

Any tips and advice is gratefully received?

 

Thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • dx100uk changed the title to NCP/BW ANPR PCN Claim Form - Lincoln Brayford Street Lincoln LN5 7BJ

 get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors [if one is not listed send to the claimant]

no need to sign anything
.
you DO NOT await the return of paperwork.
you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform [1 in the count]

 

.........................

 

use our 2 -5 line defence in most pcn claimform threads here use our search top right

 

pop it up here 1st mind

 

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

PPCs don't like doing court because even if they win the full amount they'll ending up paying more to a solicitor to represent them, but on the other hand if they never ever take anyone to court they'll be known as paper tigers.

 

I'm afraid a court case is up & running against you and you'd better get prepared for going to court.  They probably sent you a Letter Before Claim and the fact you didn't answer it will have flagged you up as someone who might not defend a court claim and they would win by default.

 

The defence we always suggest is very short and basically says you broke no contract with the PPC, so filing something generic in an emergency is no problem.

 

However, is this place local to you?  Can you easily go back in the next few days, take pictures of the signs, and try to suss out what the fleecers reckon you did wrong?

 

 

Edited by FTMDave

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you both for those replies.

 

Dx, I'll get that CPR off ASAP. Would you mind clarifying when you say "use our 2 -5 line defence". Does this literally mean a defense thats 2 to 5 lins in length? Many thanks!

 

Dave, you're absolutely correct. I always ignore letters from these sorts of firms. The place is very local so no bother at all to get back there. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes exactly that 3 lines, is usually enough you only expand on that if it goes to court and you have to submit a Witness statement.

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

OK, so as time is running out ...

 

Get the CPR off tomorrow with a free Certificate of Posting from the post office.

 

Get down to the car park, take photos of the signs, try to suss out what they reckon you did wrong.  I see it's a P&D car park so presumably you didn't pay or stayed longer than you paid for (although there seems to be a barrier on exit so how did you get out?!)

 

Normally we say to check with the council if the car park has planning permission for its signs, but this is a multi-storey car park so presumably they bothered with PP!

 

Look in the PPC Successes thread at the top of the page, any thread with "claimform" in the tile should have an example of a defence.  Post up a draft of what you propose to send, it needs to be as generic as possible. 

 

The important thing at the moment is filing the defence.  In the longer term, once we get hold of their letters (either through CPR or a SAR if they refuse to reply to the CPR) we can see what other holes to pick in their claim.  

 

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve read the last few years of successes looking at defence points and as people seem to be a little less hopeless than me and haven’t left it so late and already have pictures of signage etc I’ve collected the points that seem to work with the vagueness I need at this point. 

 

1. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of [motor vehicle].

 

2. It is denied that the Claimant entered into a contract with the Defendant. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. [The Claimant was not contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the carpark is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. The proper Claimant is the landowner.] *unsure on this bit 🤔

 

3. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all."

 

 

I noticed people had used variations on the following, but I assume it’s not possible in this case, don’t NCP usually own their land?

 

”It is denied that the Claimant has complied with Schedule 4, Protection of Freedoms Act 2012; see paragraph 5.1a. The car park signs are owned by National Car Parks Limited. Under CPR 31.14 I have requested evidence of the claimants contract between VCS and the landowner that assigns the right to enter into contracts with the public and make claims in their own name, and proof of planning permission granted for signage etc under the Town and Country Planning Act 2007.”

 

The CPR has been sent. I’m heading down to get photographs in the morning but my defence has to be in by 4pm.

 

FTMDave - Thanks for your reply. The NCP I parked in is directly opposite the multi-story NCP you have found. No barrier at this one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In your situation the defence has to be as generic as possible, and certain bits may later turn out to be pants, but that doesn't matter, it only takes one point to be picked up later by a judge in your WS to scupper NCP.

 

It's good news that the car park isn't the one I found!  It's likely NCP are "managing" the car park for someone else and may not have planning permission for their signs.  So how about (point 1 is as generic as hell) ...

 

1.  It is denied that the Claimant entered into a contract with the Defendant.

 

2.  As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. The proper Claimant is the landowner.

 

2.  It is denied that the Claimant has complied with Schedule 4, Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 to establish keeper liability.

 

3.  I believe that the claimant did not obtain planning permission granted for signage etc under the Town and Country Planning Act 2007.

 

Hang on till the last minute tomorrow (well, say 3pm, not exactly the last minute!) to see what their signage says and to see if others want to tweak the defence.

 

And obviously, in future don't throw away paperwork when you're in legal dispute and don't leave building up a case until a few hours before legal deadlines.  However what is done is done and it is still possible to fight back.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

As you have to go into Lincoln tomorrow, as well as the CPR request you've sent to the solicitors, send a SAR to NCP (with the usual free Certificate of Posting from the PO).  That way they'll be forced to show the letters they've sent you and explain what they reckon you did wrong (of course not stated in their pants roboclaim), and if they don't get their backsides into gear with a SAR it'll be you suing them!  All of this info. will be very useful down the line.

 

Oh and stick into the defence something about them inventing fictitious fees they aren't entitled to to attempt to try to get around the small claims' limit on legal costs which is an abuse of court procedure (I note they've made up a load of Unicorn Food Tax).  

Edited by FTMDave

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good grief, you've leaped into action!  Those photos are great, thanks.

 

Have you filed the defence yet?  If not, I'm thinking about a last-minute tweak.  I see that this is a P&D car park where you also have to input your registration number.  There's a possibility you paid but got the registration number wrong, which would be very positive and considered a triviality by a judge.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't submitted yet, following your advice and waiting until 3pm-ish :)

 

I checked back through my work calendar thoroughly and I believe I remember the day in question and think I'm likely in the wrong. Is it safe/wise to explain here?

Edited by BickLinc
Link to post
Share on other sites

Around the time I used that carpark quite frequently and would always pay on the App. I don't often carry change and the pay machines there were notorious for not connecting for card payments - NCP always blamed Vodafone's coverage.  

 

If my dates are correct, I had a new staff member with me on that day and we were headed for lunch. I was also in a hire car. As the hire car wasn't registered to the parking App I think it's highly likely I intended to pay for the parking when sat down for lunch but ultimately failed to do so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it's up to you, but I would consider two things.

 

1.  If you wanted to give in, the time to give in would have been at the start.  They're now suing you and if you pay now you'll have to pay their costs, and if it goes to a court case and you lose you'll have to pay their costs, so in a sense you might as well continue the fight.

 

2.  Although you were "in the wrong", it's perfectly possible that NCP don't have planning permission or sent out their demand too late, or will simply discontinue if you put in a robust Witness Statement.

 

Meanwhile I've tweaked the defence a bit, see if others agree or disagree.

 

1.  It is denied that the Claimant entered into a contract with the Defendant, or broke any such contract.

 

2.  As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. The proper Claimant is the landowner.

 

3.  It is denied that the Claimant has complied with Schedule 4, Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 to establish keeper liability.

 

4.  I believe that the claimant did not obtain planning permission granted for signage etc under the Town and Country Planning Act 2007.

 

5.  The Defendant has added additional amounts to the claim to try to circumvent limits on legal costs in an abuse of court procedure.

 

Edited by FTMDave
Usual typo!

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

NCP are bound to have messed up somewhere.

  • Like 1

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 have to go to work now so that's me out of the deadline day loop.

 

If you don't want to fight it, then simply don't file a defence.  After a few days you'll get a letter from the court saying you've lost by default, you pay, the whole thing ends there with no credit file problems.

 

However, as you really have nowt to lose, we would encourage you to file the defence.  For a start, it's not just OK that motorists continually have problems paying by card.  It's up to NCP to sort out the mess.  Not everyone has their mobile on them 25 hours a day or time to be faffing around downloading apps.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not planning on backing out now. Just wanted to be upfront and accurate with members on here. 

Let's play their game. 😃

 

From reading as much possible so far, am I correct in thinking that with some robust points, even if they were to be victorious in court, it is likely that they would have their frivolous "Unicorn Food Tax" charges reigned in? That's the impression I'm getting from other posts.

 

Again, thank you all so much for your assistance thus far, it's sincerely appreciated!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Brilliant attitude!  Yes, you're right about the Unicorn Food Tax.  The SAR should clear things up and give clearer grounds for fighting the claim.  Must dash!

  • Like 1

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say when you come to do your Witness statement that the font sizes on their main signs, especially at the entrance, are too small.  You cannot get the gist of what their terms and conditions are while driving past.

 

As their is a payment meter, their T&Cs should be on the meter so that you know what you are paying for and what their terms are.  The small sign on the meter does not look like it can contain all their terms. 

 

I am sorry to ask you this but would it be possible to take a close up of the notice on the meter so that it can be read. The sign on the meter may be enough on its own to get the Judge to throw the case out despite the signage next door to it.

 

Also they cannot charge any more than the £100 on their signs but as they are using BW Legal it is no surprise.

 

No doubt once we see the PCNS and their WS there will be more that will help you winning.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Unicorn feed tax again, can't sue the keeper for more than the Original Charge, so any additional Debt Collection fees aka the £60 they add is abuse,iof process as per HHJ Harvey at Lewes county Court

What lookedinfroinfo is indicating is that the main signage on entry and dotted around is merely an " Invitation to Treat", not the offer, the Offer and Acceptance occurs at the payment machine, so wording there is key.

  • Like 1

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

Great work from lookinforinfo.

 

When you have time, also try to find out if they have planning permission for the signs.  The council should have a portal, if not directly call or e-mail the council.

 

You've written "the pay machines there were notorious for not connecting for card payments - NCP always blamed Vodafone's coverage".  Have you got any proof of this?  It could be useful.

 

BW Legal won't send anything about planning permission or contracts, but they might , just, send a copy of the PCN so we know what you are being pursued for, but even if they don't the SAR will get to the bottom of it.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

What an idiot I am! I went back to get these images of the sign the very next day but then got caught up in life and forgot to upload them here. 

 

I've today also received a response from BWLegal which i will upload too after editing out personal details.

14050A9C-D941-40FB-AFCD-DC98E32A7038-converted-compressed.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...