Jump to content


NCP/BW ANPR PCN PAPLOC Now Claimform - appealed refused- Gatwick Airport dropoff zone **CLAIM DISCONTINUED**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 204 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

Well done on all the reading up you've done.  We wish everyone who comes here would do the same!

 

Can you please post up exactly what you wrote to BW Legal?  We need to see how much information you've given away (which unfortunately they will be very good at using against you).

 

When you say you got documentation from BW Legal, did that include the original PCN from the fleecers?  If so, we need to see 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

First the bad bit.  Your e-mail to BW Legal is about as bad as it could be as not only have you outed yourself as the driver but you told them all the stuff about being distracted by your daughter.  I'd hoped you hadn't and you could have suggested their rubbish technology was to blame (as in the other case you found).

 

However, live and learn and all that.  Every single one of us here has made mistakes in legal disputes.

 

All is not lost.

 

So who exactly are they suing?  They sent the original threats to your partner but you informed them you were the driver.  Are they suing you or your partner?

  • 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

@Nicky Boy@dx100ukI think it's likely that BW Legal are mentioning their own, made-up grace period.  From other cases IIRC it's a minute or something equally as ludicrous.

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

Found it - eventually!  Post 16 here  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/448986-gatwick-drop-off-£5-charge-for-3-minutes-what-if-i-dont-accept-the-terms/

 

NCP have their own, unilateral, made up grace period of one minute, only for the drop-off zone, this is what they will have been referring to.

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

Can you please clarify this?

 

10 hours ago, FTMDave said:

So who exactly are they suing?  They sent the original threats to your partner but you informed them you were the driver.  Are they suing you or your partner?

 

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

Well the fleecers have snatched defeat from the jaws of victory through presumably being too lazy to read e-mails properly.

 

Great news!

 

They are suing the wrong person.

 

This is not just the usual case here where they haven't bothered to use POFA correctly, they have been told the name of the person driving and have instead sued someone else.

  • 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

This gets worse and worse - for the fleecers.

 

They were told they were pursuing the wrong person and were given the identity of the right person - so proceeded to sue the wrong person.  Partner in the clear.

 

If they try to lie and say they never received the e-mail or they didn't consider it due to some legal technicality - well, OK, the PCN was sent out too late in any case to establish keeper liability.  Partner in the clear.

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

You will certainly need to file a defence.

 

We see absolutely hopeless court claims started by private parking companies all the time.  It only costs them £35 to issue a claim.  They misuse the court system to try to intimidate motorists into paying.  As they continue to do it, presumably sadly it works.  People have visions of judges in long wigs and hundreds of quid in costs and wet themselves and give in. 

 

We have a case at the moment - I kid you not - where a taxi driver stopped in a no-stopping area of an airport because someone had jumped out in front of him, and the only alternative to not stopping would have been to murder the pedestrian.  Really!  I'm not making it up.

 

The fleecers don't care.  Pay £35 for the claim.  Most give in.  Now & then they have to discontinue a case and lose £35.  It doesn't matter because those who give in pay the £35 plus £70 Unicorn Food Tax which finances two more claims, and so the cycle of fleecing continues.

 

I'm afraid you will have to be patient and be in for the long haul.

  • 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

45 minutes ago, westlondonmum said:

@FTMDave but presumably actually going to court for a case will cost them more??

Indeed.  Even if they were to beat you - won't happen - they would spend more than the court judgement amount on preparation costs.

 

But it's a numbers game to them.

 

Most people, sadly, aren't like you.  When the PCN turns up, most people think it's a fine and pay up.  The few that resist then wet themselves when the court claim arrives with visions of stern judges in wigs and thousands of pounds in costs and cough up.  There aren't many westlondonmums about.

 

Now & again the PPCs come across a westlondonmum and take a hit.

 

Another disgusting tactic the PPCs sometimes use is to begin a court case, knowing from the start it's hopeless.  They predict that the motorist will give in.  If that doesn't happen, they discontinue the case.  Now I'm not saying that will happen in your case, don't get your hopes up, it's always better to prepare too much than too little, but it's a possibility.

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...

That's just a standard response.  Par for the course.  CPR is just a request, they're not obliged to answer.  They will have to produce this documentation later down the line though in their Witness Statement.

 

27 minutes ago, westlondonmum said:

Surely the case would centre around the defendant (my partner) not being liable as he was not the driver at the time of the incident? 

Indeed, that will be one of your aces in your own Witness Statement.

 

BTW, all this "on behalf of" stuff needs to stop.  The fleecers would have been quite entitled to refuse to answer as the wrong person contacted them.  Your partner is the one being sued.  If the wrong person fills in court papers then they will be rejected and he will lose the case by default.

 

Obviously there's nothing stopping you helping your partner with court paperwork.

 

About the best thing you can do is read this thread  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/406892-highview-parking-anpr-pcn-claimform-urban-exchange-manchester-claim-dismissed/#comments  You'll see someone go through all the stages of the court process and you'll see what will happen next.

 

 

  • 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

  • 2 months later...
On 16/01/2023 at 00:51, FTMDave said:

We see absolutely hopeless court claims started by private parking companies all the time.  It only costs them £35 to issue a claim.  They misuse the court system to try to intimidate motorists into paying.  As they continue to do it, presumably sadly it works.  People have visions of judges in long wigs and hundreds of quid in costs and wet themselves and give in. 

 

We have a case at the moment - I kid you not - where a taxi driver stopped in a no-stopping area of an airport because someone had jumped out in front of him, and the only alternative to not stopping would have been to murder the pedestrian.  Really!  I'm not making it up.

 

The fleecers don't care.  Pay £35 for the claim.  Most give in.  Now & then they have to discontinue a case and lose £35.  It doesn't matter because those who give in pay the £35 plus £70 Unicorn Food Tax which finances two more claims, and so the cycle of fleecing continues.

 

I'm afraid you will have to be patient and be in for the long haul.

 

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

  • 5 months later...

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

Can you please answer what dx asked?  It is important.

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to NCP/BW ANPR PCN PAPLOC Now Claimform - appealed refused- Gatwick Airport dropoff zone **CLAIM DISCONTINUED**
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...