NCP/BW PCN PAPLOC now claimform - New Gatwick Drop Off Zone - I thought I had paid for both visits? ***Claim Dismissed***

[FTMDave]

Understood - I was barking up the wrong tree about why payment wasn't taken.

 

I have a friend who is a software engineer and he's told me several horror stories over the years about important national companies getting software delivered which hadn't been tested properly and was full of bugs, and just didn't work properly - so it's no surprise that NCP's newly-installed system was rubbish.

 

Well done on the family WSs and keeping proof of the phone call.

 

Have an excellent weekend you too!

[MoaningCrusader]

I will do FTMD.

 

Now, after posting this morning... A Notice of Intention to Proceed arrived through my letter box from BW Legal.

I have uploaded a PDF below.

I am a little confused as they claim to be giving me until the 23rd September to settle in full with them. However, my defence was received but the courts on the 22-08-22.

 

I can't find the letter from the courts confirming  receipt of my defence, but they had stated the time for BW Legal to respond was limited. Is it that they have to respond to my defence within 28 days of it being submitted, otherwise the court puts a stop on the proceedings? So if they wait until he 23rd they will be out of time to take further action, will they not?

 

I have checked on my account on MoneyClaimOnline and no further activity has been registered other than the receipt of my defence.

 

LetterofIntentiontoProceedBWLegal14-09-22.pdf

[FTMDave]

Just ignore BW Legal.  The letter is just a standard one they send out to try to scare people.

 

The dates are irrelevant, they are just pretending there is a deadline (that they have made up) after which things will get terrible for you.

[MoaningCrusader]

Thanks FTMD

 

In regards to LoC... I have included a sum of £200... But I would be more inclined to go for £1000 to cover the distress all of this putting me through.

 

In regards to the dates, the fact that they have failed to log a response to my defence could mean they are not going to proceed any further? Could it not? There is no response from them logged with the courts on my account. 

 

FYI I have just checked with MoneyClaimOnline. NCP/BWL have until the 26th September to respond to my defence with their intention to proceed with court action. A bit annoying, as I was hoping they wouldn't.

 

Tbh I have a feeling they are going to, as it would work out that they respond on Friday 23rd September to my lodged defence, as no settlement will be coming from me, I can assure you.

[dx100uk]

dont get confused with this 28 days....

 

it not a hard stop date, and with the delays in courts, we've seen N180's filed months after any 'deadline'

 

its an autostay , its not reported on mcol either when a claim IS autostayed.

 

the letter you have is a std one , its in 100's of BW claimform threads here already.

 

i know we keep saying it but you must make it a habit to read pcn claimform threads in down times, not await the next wheel poking .

by keeping up poss everyday reading threads you will eventually understand the whole process, how it works, whats to come, how to respond and whats next after that, and all the little tricks the fleecers pull along the way.

 

 

[MoaningCrusader]

I hear you dx100. I am in no way fooled. Tbh, I am very much expecting it progress after the 23rd Sept. Seem to have me well and truly on their radar.

 

I will put a bit more research in on the other threads. Thanks for the nudge.

[FTMDave]

All the SAR posts are now in a separate thread.

[MoaningCrusader]

Hi Everyone.

 

Well as I predicted, it looks like this claim is proceeding. I have just received a Notice of Proposed Allocation to the Small Claims Track.

 

I have attached the form, but left off the generic info about mediation. I am assuming that mediation is not a course I should take as it would deem all my evidence un-submissable should I use in mediation. As anything brought up in that process is confidential and cannot be presented in court. Or is it?

 

The form itself looks relatively straight forward. Questions I have per section:

 

A. Do I agree to mediation first?

 

B. Contact Details - straightforward

 

C. I assume my answer is 'yes'

 

D. I would prefer to submit the defence in writing to avoid this taking up anymore of my time with having to actually attend a hearing. However, if you feel there's a higher chance they won't turn up to the hearing, then I'll go for it. I am just not available all of December at present.

 

E1. I suggest the nearest Magistrates to myself. Obvs.

 

E2. N/A

 

E3. I will be submitting written witness statements from those present when I went online to pay the drop off charge. But they will not be attending in person. I assume then I do not mention them here. Although I would love to fly my parents over and then charge NCP for this expense upon wining my claim! A nice wee holiday for him.

 

Do I need to send a copy of the completed form to BW Legal as well? Or just the court. Having checked online, I don't think I can fill this all in through MCO.

 

I hope to hear your advice on the above asap. I must have a response to the court by 10th October.

NoticeofProposedAllocation23-09-22.pdf

[dx100uk]

You respond as any other pcn claimform thread to the DQ n180.

 

Is the DQ showing as being send out on mcol status?

 

And I'm not sure where you think a magistrate or criminal court is anything to do with a civil court claim?

 

Dx

[brassnecked]

Not all Magistrates ad Court buildings have a County Curt in them.

[MoaningCrusader]

Thanks for your response Dx100.

 

So I will follow this course of action as found on a VCS pcn line

 

no to mediation

 

the rest is obv

 

3 copies

1 to court

1 to NCP minus phone/sig/email

1 for your file.

 

Yes, the DQ is up on my online MCOL account.

 

The form asks for me to provide a County Court hearing centre. When I search through the government website to find a court/tribunal for money claim near me, my local magistrates court comes up as nearest. Can you advise any further on this?

 

I was unable to find much on the submitting in writing. A few links to feeds would be helpful here.

 

I also appear to be the only one when I search for other threads on Gatwick Drop Off Zone PCN.

 

Is this the case?

[FTMDave]

The Magistrates' Court is for criminal cases.  Yours is a civil case - look for the County Court.

 

It's a bad idea to accept the case being judged on the papers.  Firstly, there is no incentive for the fleecers, who are the ones who would have to travel to court, to discontinue.  Secondly, if you're not physically there you can't counter their lies or clarify stuff for the judge. 

[MoaningCrusader]

Thanks FTMDave. I will continue to look for a live hearing then.

 

FYI The search on government website has given me my local COUNTY court. So all good on that front. I will include it in section E1

[FTMDave]

I think there are these:

 

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/449205-notice-to-keeper-gatwick-ncp/#comment-5167775

 

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/442849-ncp-gatwick-pcn-out-of-time/#comment-5140224

 

[dx100uk]

 

 

 

3 copies

yes to mediation (unless you filed our Statute Barred Defence OR this is a claim for a Private Parking Ticket)

1 wit you

Suitability for determination without a hearing? no

the rest is obv

1 to the court

1 to sols (omit phone/sig/email)

1 for your file

 

dx

[MoaningCrusader]

Thanks dx100 that clarifies things perfectly.

 

Can I ask... Why no to the free court mediation? Is this simply because these crooks will never agree to anything other than getting the their money?

 

Also, am I able to supply signed witness statements from persons present when I attempted the online payment with my WS when it comes to it?

 

What will I put for reasons why I want a hearing and not a determination on paper?

[dx100uk]

you have nothing to mediate over, you dont want to pay a reduced sum, the claim is speculative.

 

as for witnesses, pers i would involve nor is there a need to involve, other people, 

[dx100uk]

Should read would not 

 

Dx

[MoaningCrusader]

No worries dx100 I got your meaning. All good.

[FTMDave]

2 hours ago, dx100uk said:

as for witnesses, pers i would involve nor is there a need to involve, other people, 

Why do you say this dx?

 

Nothing wrong with having a forum discussion now and again to mull over the best way forward!

 

We're only guessing, as it will depend on the SAR and the fleecers' WS, but there's fair chance further down the line that on the one hand there will be the charlatans with no mention at all of their malfunctioning equipment or the OP calling them to try to effect payment, and on the other hand the OP,  proof of the call on their phone, two WSs from witnesses who saw the attempt at payment and heard the phone call and the SAR showing the fleecers did sweet FA about following up the call.

 

Do you not think two brief WSs from other people in the car would be an advantage for the OP?

[brassnecked]

Might be FTMDave if they are willing might complicate things if the fleecers want their appointed at last minute brief to cross examine the witnesses, Perhaps DX is thinking keep it as simple as possible to give fleecer's no other avenues of challenge.

[Nicky Boy]

As I understand it, the fleecers never send their own dodgy witness to court, so couldn't really complain about lack of witnesses to cross examine!

 

As long as the witness statements were short and to the point, it shouldn't complicate matters?

[MoaningCrusader]

Thanks all of the above. I think it is good to discuss the merits of written witness statements in these cases. As with online payments, sadly there is very little way to evidence a system failure or payment attempt. As we can't recall our online activity on other people's websites easily.

 

I am going to draft my reasons for wanting a hearing and not going on a paper only course later and hopefully we can make sure that is watertight.

 

Now on note of recalling data etc. If anyone is reading this thread and dependant on itemised mobile phone calls as evidence. BE AWARE unless you are paying for itemised billing, your call records are only kept for 90days online! I have just went online to print off the evidence of my call to NCP on 20th Oct 2021 to discover they no longer have the calls on their system.

 

However, I did point out to my phone provider that if the police required this info for court, it could be found. The guy on the phone totally agreed and has now worked out that if you put in a SAR with your phone company for a particular day, it can be dug out and found and your itemised calls sent to you. PHEW! Here's hoping this happens quickly and without any issue, otherwise I'll be starting another SAR claim

 

Just lucky I spotted that at this stage and not at the point of submitting my WS and relevant evidence.

 

[FTMDave]

Yes, a difference of opinion is no problem, I've often got things wrong or have been persuaded towards a change of strategy here.  It is a forum after all.

 

I didn't know about the 90-day phone record limit.  Well done in getting this sorted well ahead of time.

[MoaningCrusader]

We can discuss the written WS further, as we have time before it will be required. I tend to sway towards the side of keeping it simple. It would be a pain if I had to fly my parents back over.

 

The main thing is in regards to filling in this questionnaire is that I am not currently looking to have any witnesses giving evidence at the actual hearing. So I will just enter '1' into E3.

 

But if we can all agree, I would want to submit signed written ws from my parents and partner who were present and witnessed me going online to complete the drop off charge payment in relation to this pcn. If agreed, I assume I can include these signed statements with my full WS supplied before the hearing, once a date has been allocated