Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Is there any point in revisiting the fact that the initial speculative invoice (which I never received anyway) was issued more than 14 days after the alleged incident anyway? Should that alone not merit the throwing out of the case to start with?
    • no cca = no pay ....end of. you should not have been running the sb date to infinity by paying debts no-one has enforceable paperwork for...might as well have burned the money for all the good its done you.   dx  
    • Despite the rapid start of vaccinating the population, the UK now has the 13th highest vaccination rate in Europe and the government has received criticism for the (lack of) speed of its booster program and the (lack of) availability of vaccines for 12-17 year olds.   - and falling - 11th not long ago   • Europe: COVID-19 vaccination rates by country | Statista WWW.STATISTA.COM Belgium, Ireland, and Portugal are among the European countries with the highest number of COVID-19 vaccine doses administered per 100 people.  
    • Just to be sure, you are suggesting that I adapt and use this text? ..... Grace Period: 45. Code 13 of IPC Code of Practice states: ‘13.2 Before a Parking Charge is issued Motorists must be allowed a Grace Period save and except when 13.3 is applicable. A Grace Period is a 10 minute period at the end of a Permitted Period of Parking. 13.3 A Grace Period is not required when the Permitted Period of Parking does not exceed 1 hour providing that the signage on the site makes it clear to the Motorist, in a prominent font, that no Grace Period applies on that land.’ Fifthly, I would ask the Claimant to provide evidence that the car remained in the car park for more than the ten minute Grace Period allowed by the IPC Code of Practice. The parking space became unpermitted at the moment the driver left the site, so then a ten minute Grace Period would apply. As the vehicle was there for no more than ten minutes, then according to the ICP’s Code of Practice, which the Claimants says they complied with at all material times, a PCN should not have been issued. Alternatively, the Claimant is invited to show the signage which makes it clear that no Grace Period applies. Planning Permission 46. Finally, the Claimant really emphasis their signage in their Witness Statement. In schedule 2 of their (expired) service agreement it says that ‘The Company will provide the following – 1. Supply 6 Vehicle Control Service v Claim Number: 16 x Enforcement Signs (MAXIMUM STAY 90 MINUTES WHILST SHOPPING IN THE STORES).’ I was only able to find 5 enforcement signs (Exhibit 15). This is another example of VCS not caring about legal obligations, this time within their own contracts. Regardless, I do not believe they have planning permission for these signs, which is a criminal offence under The Town and County Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007. I have requested proof of planning permission from VCS by means of a CPR request, but they have not replied. I have searched Hillingdon council planning portal and I cannot find planning permission for the signs. Whilst should mean a contract could not be formed between driver and the Claimant, as you cannot form a contract with illegality, I would like to use this as another example of how unbothered the Claimant is about the law and how they do not adhere to their own IPC Code of Practice as ‘Operators must be aware of their legal obligations and implement the relevant legislation and guidance when operating their businesses’ (Code 25.1 IPC Code of Practice). The Claimant does not care to adhere to Code of Practice they signed up to and generally do not care about keeping their legal affairs in order. I would consider that a blatant disregard for the rules and the law. 47. I have done some research into the Claimant and their court action. They have a pattern of behaviour whereby a VCS paralegal writes a Witness Statement, then mentions in the last paragraph they may be unable to attend court and then the paralegal never turns up to be crossexamined. In the event Ambreen Arshad is unable to attend court to be asked about her claims, then I would like to know why she is not able to attend when the hearing has been scheduled months in advance, is during working hours and as a result of covid, is online, so there is no travel involved. Mohammed Wali, the other paralegal employed by VCS, does exactly the same. Vehicle Control Service v Claim Number: 17 Additionally, I suspect the patrol officer will also have an aversion to explaining himself to the court. E. Double Recovery Legal Fees 48. The Claimant’s Particulars of Claim include £50 legal costs, yet in the letter dated 29th June 2021, the Claimant stated that they were no longer represented by Elms Legal and all further correspondence should be sent to the VCS in-house litigation department (Exhibit 16). I am not sure why the Claimant is asking the Defendant to contribute to their employee’s salary. 49. Furthermore, as per another letter dated 24th August 2021 (Exhibit 17), the Claimant wrote, ‘Should you fail to accept our offer of settlement then we will proceed to Trial and bring this letter to the Court’s attention upon question of costs in order seek further costs of £220 incurred in having to instruct a local Solicitor to attend the hearing in conjunction with the amount claimed on the Claim Form.’ I find this an extraordinary statement given the Claimant knows legal costs are capped at £50 in Small Claims Court. I cannot think of any reason why the Claimant would write this letter other than to intimidate the opposing party with the threat of an extortionate sum of money, hoping they would be able to take advantage of someone not knowing the Small Claims Court rules. Given that this letter came from the Claimant’s in-house litigation department, clearly well-versed in the law, I cannot see this as anything other than deceitful and disingenuous behaviour and I hope the court will not tolerate it. Vehicle Control Service v Claim Number: 18 Contractual costs / debt recovery charge 50. In addition to the £50 legal costs, the Claimant is seeking recovery of the original £100 parking charge plus an additional £60 which is described as ‘contractual costs and interest’ in the Particulars of Claim and as ‘debt recovery charge’ in the Claimant’s Witness Statement (para 31). No further justification or breakdown has been provided as required under Civil Procedure Rule 16.4. 51. In the event the court has somehow allowed Protection of Freedom Act to apply, then para 4(5) Schedule 4, Protection of Freedom Act, states, ‘the maximum sum which may be recovered from the keeper is the amount specified in the notice to keeper’ which in this case is £100. 52. In the more likely event that Protection of Freedom Act 2012 does not apply to this case, then the Claimant still must demonstrate how these alleged additional costs have been occurred otherwise it would appear to be an attempt at double recovery. 53. In previous parking charge cases, it has been found that the parking charge is a sum so high that it includes the cost of recovery. In the case the Claimant cited, Parking Eye Ltd v Beavis (2015) UKSC 67. It was held that the sum (£85) had already incorporated the costs of a private parking business model as it was inflated so as to comfortably cover all costs. The Supreme Court held that a parking firm which is not in [exclusive] possession cannot plead any part of their case in damages. The case provides precedent that £85 (or up to a Trade Body ceiling of £100 depending on the parking firm) covers the costs of the letters.
    • I deal some time with cash some time with card but i keep all recipts i put my money on  20 october  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

NPE/BW ANPR PCN PAPLOC - wrong reg - MJB Winelodge, Bridge Road, Lowestoft, Suffolk NR32 3LR


Recommended Posts

My first draft attached is based on a post half way down the link from FTM Dave. However, I would like to find info referring to mistyped reg numbers and how it's not acceptable to fine motorists for a mistyped entry.  Any ideas how to find this info or proposed info so I can quote section and para to back up the info in the letter would be really appreciated.

 

Many thanks.

 

 

WWW.GOV.UK

We are consulting on new measures to improve the regulation of the private parking industry.

 

Others have said how the new

Reply Letter of Claim - BW Legal.pdf

Edited by SCDH
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done on finding the snotty letter on Happy54's thread, that is exactly the sort of thing you should be sending.

 

You also link to the government consultation document.  What you are looking for is in "Chapter 4: The level of parking charges".

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 work.

 

We'd probably have made it "snottier"!  However, the important thing is you've shown you know the law and the PPC know they are on a hiding to nothing if they do do court.

 

There are no guarantees, but we've seen them recently back off virtually always in these cases.

 

Write on the bottom of your letter COPIED TO NATIONAL PARKING ENFORCEMENT LTD.  This is because crooked solicitors like BW Legal are infamous for egging on their clients to go to court, even if the case is pants.  After all, they get paid either way.  Let the PPC know directly you've sussed their sordid little game.

 

Obviously quote their PCN reference number on the letters.

 

If none of the other regulars disagree, invest in two 2nd class stamps tomorrow and get two free Certificates of Posting from the post office.

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

Thanks for taking a look. I just didn't want cause confrontation for the sake of it but I take your point and I appreciate there are no guarantees.  

 

Good advice about copied to COPIED TO NATIONAL PARKING ENFORCEMENT LTD and quoting the PCN reference number on the letters.

 

I was going to ask if the letters needed to be registered post but you've answered my question by getting certificates of posting.

 

I'll update the thread on the response or lack of when their cut off date to reply has passed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Dear all,

 

I've just had a letter from BW Legal (attached) which is in response to my letter after receiving their LBC.  As you will see, they quote Parkingeye V Beavis in the fact that they don't have to consider loss as a relevant factor.

 

While they state a full and correct reg must be entered to avoid becoming liable for a PCN, they obviously don't mention that it's a demines offence but are happy to discuss it in court.

 

I would also value opinions on their view that once I left the carpark to receive payment for the meter the offence was complete.

 

Thanks in advance again for all your help.

Snotty Letter Response.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

what witness statement with the snotty letter did you send?

 

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

why did you send that, you were not advised too nor told us you were??

 

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

Because it demonstrates that payment was made and when I mentioned it on the forum earlier the response was positive.  If it goes to court they would see that statement anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well we didnt say send that but no matter. next time stick to the advice please don't play your cards early!!.

 

yours is not the next move

wait and see if they issue a letrter of claim, they have 6yrs, don't move without informing them.

 

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to NPE/BW ANPR PCN PAPLOC - wrong reg - MJB Winelodge, Bridge Road, Lowestoft, Suffolk NR32 3LR

Thanks DX, 

 

While your communications are direct, I do appreciate your knowledge and experience in these matters and genuinely value your input.  As far as I see it, the facts are the facts and I'm certainly not going to commit perjury in court by saying anything other than what the statement says.  I know you weren't implying that, I'm just saying that the statement tells the truth and I can't deviate from it. However, I do take your point about not playing my cards early. 

 

While they might have a technical point over a breach by leaving the carpark to get the money for the machine, I would counter that with the point that it was very dark and the machine had no lighting.  Also, the street lights were facing away from all signage resulting in poor lighting to read.  As a result, it's hard to be responsible for an accidental breach if you aren't aware of the terms when first entering the carpark.  However, I respect your advice if you think otherwise.

 

Can you confirm that I need to receive another Letter of Claim before having to respond?

 

Many thanks.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was in a timewarp there. Sadly not firing on all cylinders for a good while to come yet..

 

youve had the paploc so what they might do is leave it till near statute barred date and send another paploc years down the line or raise a court claim...who knows..

But safe to say yours is not the next move unless you move...

 

Its also worthy to note they cant intimate they can enforce reverse trespass. They cant even enforce trespass on the land they might manage, let alone leave the site and enter another site and say thats not allowed.....

 

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

Your letter to them did admit that you were the driver. That isn't fatal but in situations where there is no transfer of liability from the driver to the keeper then there are occasions when the Court will not allow the assumption that the keeper is automatically the driver.  So a driver can win the case if there is insufficient evidence to prove they were driving at the time.

In your case the result probably hangs on the reg.number and good luck with winning that DCBL and NPE. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

No real harm has been done but the thing to remember is that rogue solicitors like BW Legal who are in cahoots with the PPCs are simply conmen.  They're solicitors, they know the law, they know about "de minimis", they know the money isn't owed but carry on regardless.

 

That's why forum regular lookinforinfo prepared the snotty letter you found to show their sordid little schemes had been sussed and it would have been better to send them the whole thing.

 

Once you start discussing evidence with them they will come out with every lie imaginable to try to get you to pay.  It's complete nonsense to say the grace period ended because you went to get a quid from the chippy, what you did was no different to going back to your car to get some change, for example.

 

You've been through PAPLOC now, they sent the Letter of Claim, you told them where to get off, relax now, yours is not the next move.

 

 

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

Thanks gents,

 

I've obviously made mistakes with the statement of payment confirming me as the driver but it also helps to confirm payment was made, bit of a double edged sword but lesson learnt.

 

Point taken about not discussing points of law and yes, I can't see the difference between getting a quid from the chippy or anywhere else.

 

Also, good to know they can't enforce trespass or reverse trespass.

 

As advised by all of you, I'll let them make the next move.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still plenty to send them packing .

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

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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...