UKCPM 2*PCN's Now PAPLOC's - residential parking - Highbury Drive Leatherhead

[FTMDave]

OK, so invest in two 2nd class stamps today and get two free Certificates of Posting from the post office.

[sandokan]

thank you very much for your assistance so far and fingers crossed for what's coming.

Just to make sure I get it right:

1. I'll send the text with the suggested amendments exactly as it is by 2nd class with Royal Mail with receipt signature.

2. Because I will write the case ID for each recipient I won't mention anything about myself, correct? (it is obvious but trying to be extra cautious)

Thank you.

 

 

 

 

[Nicky Boy]

1. Correct. No "signatures", just free proof of postage.

2. Yes, you need to quote their ref number. Just say exactly what Dave has written, nothing extra. (Don't want to give any clues away).

[sandokan]

Thank you for confirming Nicky Boy, I am just heading off to post them.

[sandokan]

Hi all, 

Just a quick question please,

because I had two PCNs, I also received two letters from Gladstone Solicitors, one of them came earlier (deadline 26th November which was sent) and another one identical that came later with the deadline of 10th December .

Do I send the same snotty letter for the second one as well?

Technically I should send it to meet the deadline, but just in case is there anything else needs to be done?

I'll send it tomorrow as usual, 2nd class with proof of postage. Thank you. 

[dx100uk]

yes, you must always reply to any PAPLOC

Be it a repeat for the same PCN or a new PCN when one was sent for a previous PCN.

but you always run the 30 days deadline.....

 

[sandokan]

Thank you dx100uk, will do that and send it tomorrow the same snotty letter I sent two weeks ago.

[FTMDave]

Have a read of westridge's short thread  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/457529-cpm-no-windscreen-pcn-greenwich-peninsula-patrol-cutter-lane-east-greenwich-greenwich-peninsula-london-se10-0xx-on-26012023/#comments 

Like in your case, Gladstones lied about the amount of solicitors' costs in the Letter of Claim.

Westridge wrote to the Solicitors Regulation Authority who investigated Gladstones, who had to write and apologise.  Ho!  Ho!  Ho!

If you have a spare moment I suggest you do likewise, it's only an e-mail, it will annoy Gladstones, and like the snotty letter it will mark you out as a pain in the backside who it is better to leave alone.

Edited December 11, 2023 by FTMDave
Sorted out link mistake

[sandokan]

Thank you very much FTMDave and apologies for my slow response!

Of course I will send the email now mentioning that there is evidence in the online space that GS had knowingly added a higher amount in the fixed solicitors' costs section and that I would like to submit a formal complain.

Would be fine if I print screen only the section where GS acknowledges the mistake and they say it should be 50 and 80 ?

Secondly,

I will be outside UK between tomorrow and 1st of Jan when I will return,

should I inform anyone that I will be out of the country between this period (19 Dec- 1Jan)?

I remember I came across something that I should let the solicitors know about this but I am not 100% sure.

I really appreciate your help with this.

[FTMDave]

I see you have two LoCs, to complain to the SRA, simply attach a copy of Gladdy's first letter to you and point out that the real fixed solicitors' costs are £50 at small claims for that sum but that Gladstones have lied in their letter.

There's no need to reference westridge's thread.  Just point out the lies they have told you.

A second complaint for the second LoC can wait till you are back in the UK.  That one can be beefed up

Being away from home when you're in legal dispute is always dodgy as you would not be able to defend any court claim.  Is it possible to get someone pick up your post during that period?

 

[dx100uk]

4 hours ago, sandokan said:

should I inform anyone that I will be out of the country between this period (19 Dec- 1Jan)?

only ever necessary if a court claim has been raised....

thread title updated

dx

 

[sandokan]

Thank you FTMDave, yes there is someone who will be here, but not me personally. that was my concern as I am the only one involved in this.

I will write now the LoC to SRA, fingers crossed  

dx, thank you very much, noted. 

[FTMDave]

In the past the the PPCs have been spanked several times in court in residential parking cases, so now it is very unlikely that they will do court.

Unlikely but not impossible.  Obviously it's better to prepare too much than too little when you're in legal dispute.  In the past we've had people who lost cases by default through being abroad for extended periods and thus not knowing that court papers had turned up.

In any case from when court papers are sent out to when defendants have a deadline to act  is 19 days.  You'll only be away for 14.

Plus you have someone to look at the mail.  So relax and enjoy your break!

Edited December 18, 2023 by FTMDave
Typo

[sandokan]

Happy New Year good people! I hope that you all had restful and good quality time with your loved ones.

 

I sent the email to SRA where I raised my concern regarding the firm (GS) didn't acted transparently and acted with integrity (not sure this was precisely the motive) but I mentioned that costs for such claim should be GBP 50 and not GBP 80. However, SRA replied to me and I quote:

"We have previously investigated similar concerns about the firm's Letter if Claims. I had raised queries with the firm regarding these concerns. The firm explains there has been a technical error in that the incorrect number of GBP 80 has been endorsed as the estimated solicitors and confirm it should have indicated GBP 50. The firm have taken all necessary corrective action in relation to the math field in the system which generates the estimated solicitors costs.

It appears, there has been a technical error regarding the figures generated for the estimated solicitors costs. However, the firm have taken steps to correct their system to prevent similar instances arising in the future. I cannot find the firm has sent further Letter of Claims since correcting their systems. As such, I do not consider any further action is required on our part. the firm refers to the costs as estimated as if a claim is issued, the claim form would reflect the accurate figures which are being claims (I think should be been "claimed" not claims).

For the reasons given above, I cannot conclude that the firm's behaviour represents a serious failure to comply  with our standards or requirements. For that reason, we will not be investigating this matter further on this occasion and I will take steps to close my file.

I appreciate this is not the response you were seeking, but I do hope my letter has helped  explain our position and the reasons for our decision."

 

From my point of view I am not convinced about this corrective action since in the greenwich peninsula case , the LoC was sent on 27 October and mine was sent 1 month after than, on 26 Nov.

 

Any ideas/views on this please? Thank you.

 

[lookinforinfo]

You could write back and ask whether when motorists are knowingly being overcharged through a glitch in the system, are they being reimbursed when they overpay. If they are not is that not fraudulent or a malpractice that should be stopped at the very least. 

I am not an expert on writing coding but it seems a comparatively quick and simple task to amend an eight to a five.

[FTMDave]

The SRA were never going to do anything, but you will be known now by Gladstones as a real pain in the backside.  Not only have you not been frightened by their threats but you have also done your homework regarding the court system & costs and took the trouble to rattle their cage with the SRA.

Hopefully they will now leave you in peace and go and look for someone daft enough to be scared and to give in.

[FTMDave]

I see Gladstones apologised to Westfield on 7 December for their "technical error" (yeah, right) after being ticked off by the SRA.

So if they do it again after 7 December it'll be obvious they've been lying to the SRA and their actions were deliberate.

We will be checking, Will & John.

[sandokan]

Hello beautiful people,

There has been some silence over the last two months, but I received a letter from GS about two weeks ago. I didn't posted earlier as it didn't seemed to be a court claim. This letter in short, ask me to pay as their client has the right to commence Court proceedings without further reference to myself, I wonder what that means "without reference to me" would I be informed in any way or not if they bring me to court? 

A more interesting things was that GS posted in the envelope details for another PCN that is related to another person which implicitly shared their name, address, car registration, photos etc. can be seen in the pdf attachment here. Do you see a point for me to try and inform SRA about their mistake? Might have been the intern sending letters...

 

Many thanks.

GS letters in 2024.pdf

[FTMDave]

Just ignore Gladdy's letter.  They were definitely going to take you to court after the last one - yet here they are still faffing around.

Yes, keep the heat on them with another complaint to the SRA about sending someone else's details to you.  The SRA will do nothing but you'll flash up as bad news for Will & John and they'll know it is best to leave you in peace.

In fact why not make a third complaint?  Their first LoC contained lies about the claim form fee, and their second LoC had the same lies, so you can complain about the second one and that their assurances to correct their "technical error" haven't come to much. 

 

 

[lookinforinfo]

I recently posted a case on Iamgnome's thread that helps your residential case. i have also included this one for you just to show the other one was not a fluke.

Parking Prankster: Link Parking and Overstone Court - getting your money back

PARKING-PRANKSTER.BLOGSPOT.COM

---

Link Parking entered into an agreement with Isis Cardiff Management Company Limited to control unauthorised parking at Overstone Court, Card...

 

 

.

[Nicky Boy]

On 14/03/2024 at 22:26, sandokan said:

A more interesting things was that GS posted in the envelope details for another PCN that is related to another person which implicitly shared their name, address, car registration, photos etc

From the wording on their letter, it looks like the other victim is a bit of a fighter.

Just a possible suggestion to try and stir things up for GS...

Why not send the victim the paperwork you've received with a covering note explaining what's happened and refer them here to CAG for advice on making a GDPR claim?

[FTMDave]

You do have a spiteful bloody-minded nature Nick.

Something we certainly have in common!

[sandokan]

Thank you guys!

@lookinforinfo thank you for the case, it seem to similar with my case which is gold.

@Nicky Boy shouldn't be ICO?

 

Personal data breaches: a guide

ICO.ORG.UK

 

For CAG I found this  The Confidentiality Advisory Group (CAG) is an independent body which provides expert advice on the use of confidential patient information. This includes providing advice to us, the Health Research Authority (HRA) for research uses. It also provides advice to the Secretary of State for Health for non-research uses.

Edited March 19 by sandokan

[Nicky Boy]

18 minutes ago, sandokan said:

shouldn't be ICO?

Yes, but the process starts here...

https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint/data-protection-complaints/what-to-expect/

This involves making a complaint to GS first before approaching ICO.

However, at the time of the complaint, I beleive we'd advise the complainant to ask for some compensation and take it from there. @FTMDave??

22 minutes ago, sandokan said:

For CAG I found this  The Confidentiality Advisory Group (CAG) is an independent body which provides expert advice on the use of confidential patient information. This includes providing advice to us, the Health Research Authority (HRA) for research uses. It also provides advice to the Secretary of State for Health for non-research uses.

No, I meant this forum, The Consumer Action Group, where you're posting right now.

(We're in the slow process of rebranding as The National Consumer Service.)

[FTMDave]

10 hours ago, Nicky Boy said:

However, at the time of the complaint, I beleive we'd advise the complainant to ask for some compensation and take it from there. @FTMDave??

If the person does come here we would certainly advise that.