NCP/BW ANPR PCN - Cambridge North Station

[Nicky Boy]

I think Dave will be jumping up and down with excitement, he loves these.

He'll probably be along shortly...

[EssexChap]

We have also received a Final Demand letter from BW Legal warning they will be sending a Letter of Claim if we don't contact them before 9 November. Awaiting your guidance on this too therefore. 

[dx100uk]

On 07/09/2023 at 10:11, honeybee13 said:

The reminder is the latest in a series of threatograms. We only suggest taking action if you get a letter headed Letter of Claim.

I would try to get over thinking that threads are depressing. The one thing you need in order to get the better of the PPCs is the knowledge that comes from reading similar threads here.

HB

 

[FTMDave]

Well, time for the teenager to have a serious think if she/he wants to sue NCP for distress due to not respecting the SAR request.

There is a thread here from someone who did precisely that  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/452147-loc-to-ncp-for-failure-to-supply-sar-paid-in-full/#comments

Get them to read the thread and decide.

As they will see, the procedure is extremely easy, there really is no defence possible, and in this case NCP immediately rolled over and gave in ...

... but we've seen with other companies that they go running to solicitors, of course bottom barrel solicitors who work with private parking companies 'cos they can't get other work, who then file ridiculous defences just to drag things out so they can mess the motorist about and make money out of their thicko clients.  So that is a possibility too.

Their call.

[EssexChap]

Well we're not really interested in suing NCP for the hell of it, we just want the parking charge to go away. And we need them to respond to the SAR to be able to do that realistically.

How do I make them provide the SAR info?

Shall I just write to them threatening the action and copying to their legal team and BW Legal?

[lookinforinfo]

Railway land is usually covered by Byelaws so the 14 day rule probably wouldn't apply.

[Nicky Boy]

You've already asked nicely once and they'e ignored you.

 

The only way to really put the pressure on, is to send a letter of claim... and that is exactly what you've suggested above.

Only thing is if they ignore you again and you don't follow through with a claim, they'll just think you're a pussy and will roll over in court.

[EssexChap]

Is the Letter of Claim the same as Letter Before Claim? I'm getting confused by the jargon! 

Edited October 13, 2023 by EssexChap

[Nicky Boy]

The process is:

ask nicely (you've already done that).

Lletter before claim giving them 14 days to comply.

Then if they don't comply, on day 15 click off the claim on mcol.

It's a slamdunk win in court, because they  have an obligation to comply with statute.

If they haven't complied, they literally have no defence.

As Dave already said, they can just pay up or...

"but we've seen with other companies that they go running to solicitors, of course bottom barrel solicitors who work with private parking companies 'cos they can't get other work, who then file ridiculous defences just to drag things out so they can mess the motorist about and make money out of their thicko clients.  So that is a possibility too."

[EssexChap]

2 hours ago, lookinforinfo said:

Railway land is usually covered by Byelaws so the 14 day rule probably wouldn't apply.

Yes, exactly. That's why we're trying to get the data via the SAR. If they don't know who the driver is they can't pursue using POFA, I think that's correct?

 

@Nicky Boy 

Does our claim run alongside their claim, though, assuming they proceed as threatened by the latest DWLegal Final Notice?

I take them to court while they take us to court ie two separate actions?

Suing for providing the SAR data doesn't help us find out whether they've come after us illegally under the station bylaws etc does it? Or does it?

[Nicky Boy]

I don't know why you think a SAR will help with that?

They will have NO record of who was driving.

Have you been reading other threads to educate yourself at all?

 

2 hours ago, EssexChap said:

Is the Letter of Claim the same as Letter Before Claim?

Yes.

 

Here's a useful list of some of the acronyms we use

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/147286-posting-in-this-forum-and-a-z-of-motoring-terms/#comment-4399743

 

[EssexChap]

Sorry I'm getting really confused now. 

I thought the SAR was to get the data that proved they were acting outside the railway bylaw rules? Otherwise why are we doing it?

"Certainly get the SAR off. 

There are other things that are probably wrong with the PCN.  It's also highly likely that they will try to pretend that POFA applies until they're challenged by which time they'll have tied themselves in knots."

[Nicky Boy]

1 hour ago, EssexChap said:

Suing for providing the SAR data doesn't help us find out whether they've come after us illegally under the station bylaws etc does it? Or does it?

No, it doesn't. Byelaws are exactly what they say.

The main point is that POFA2012 cannot be used because an area covered under byelaws is not "relevant land" as described in POFA.

Therefore, liability cannot be transferred from the driver (who they cannot identify), to the Keeper, under the terms of POFA.

Start reading up around the forum!

1 hour ago, EssexChap said:

I thought the SAR was to get the data that proved they were acting outside the railway bylaw rules? Otherwise why are we doing it?

I've had a look back up the thread... The SAR is to obtain all the paperwork that's been binned at your end.

As well as reading other threads, it would be a good idea to keep up with your own as well

[EssexChap]

NickyBoy,

I totally understand that's it frustrating for you experts to have a newbie like me getting confused and asking stupid questions all the time. But I have been reading,

I've spent hours doing just that, but this stuff is all new to me and it's very easy to get confused when you're learning.

Really sorry if it's annoying to you but I just want to get this sorted and to be honest snippy remarks just add to the stress of the whole situation.  

"All the paperwork that's been binned at your end" is, of course, just the original PCN which my lad threw away because he'd paid to park. If you'd prefer I just paid the sharks, just say so and I'll leave you in peace. 

[Nicky Boy]

Apologies, "Snippy" was not the intention.

And I'm NOT an "expert", just the teaboy

[FTMDave]

2 hours ago, EssexChap said:

Well we're not really interested in suing NCP for the hell of it, we just want the parking charge to go away.

OK, thank you, point taken.

Unfortunately however it's a huge mistake to throw away the paperwork.  It means we haven't a clue what the motorist is being accused of, whether they have followed the legal protocols or not, whether they are likely to do court or not, etc., etc.  We're groping around in the dark.

And as you can see, they take advantage of this and are uncooperative about replying to a SAR.

So - have a look at post 52 here  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/457490-espgladstones-mnpr-pcn-claimform-spinningfields-estate-manchester-received-nothing-prior-to-claimform/page/3/#comments  (I think it's post 52, sometimes the post count goes wonky, it might be a couple of posts above or below).

There is a suggested Letter of Claim (yes the same thing as Letter Before Claim).  Adapt it and sent it to NCP today.  If after receiving this letter they still don't cooperate, you can sue them but you don't have to.  The letter is designed to get serious about legal threats and focus their minds.

There is also a letter to send to the solicitors.  Obviously adapt it too.  Start with "Dear Rachael and Sean" for example as they are the two who run BW Legal.

Get two free Certificates of Posting from the post office.  This strategy worked in mkontheroad's case - hopefully it will with yours too.

[EssexChap]

@Nicky Boy 

 

@FTMDave Great, thankyou. I'll get them both drafted today. Cheers

[EssexChap]

So got a reply from NCP after threatening them with legal action, and guess what,  it's literally identical to the one in the other NCP SAR thread. "We did not receive the (first) letter..."     Liar, liar, pants on fire. I presume therefore this is their standard response to any SAR request. Ignore it until someone threatens legal action then pretend you didn't get it. This is scandalous. Should I follow up with the information commissioner etc?

Any way, I will send the proof of identity as requested by them and see where that gets us. 

[FTMDave]

If you haven't replied to them yet, I suggest you keep the heat on them.  Write to them on Monday, and enclose
   - original SAR request
   - proof of posting
   - I.D.
and point out that they are already in breach of their statutory duty and you would be quite within your rights to sue them immediately for distress.  However, you are prepared to delay doing so, on the proviso that within ten days of your letter, i.e. 2 November, a complete reply to the SAR pops through your letter box. 

I know you're reluctant to sue them, this doesn't mean you have to sue them on 3 November, it just means you can, and hopefully you'll get the desired response before.

Yes, why not kick up a stink for them with the ICO.

 

Edited October 21, 2023 by FTMDave
Timescales updated

[lookinforinfo]

Essex lad-look at them not sending you the sar. you want the PCN case to be over . They won't want to go to court  over the sar. 

Write to them pointing out that you both have claims against each other. Rather than both sides ending up in court perhaps the best recourse is both agree to drop the cases against each other .....................that way neither of you have to pay the Court to instigate proceedings or risk losing  the case.

So win win or lose lose depending on your pint of view. But it is a way of bringing things to a close quicker than going through the Courts.

[EssexChap]

FTM Dave: No haven't responded, wanted to wait for you chaps to advise! 

Lookinforinfo: yes, that would seem a very rational thing to do if we were dealing with fair minded people! Indeed they might have suggested this.  But I guess they know the facts same as I do, so from what everyone here has said, they'll keep up the bully boy scare tactics until they have to back down? 

[FTMDave]

Let's forget about the matter of the SAR for the moment.

You've seen how the fleecing PPCs act.  They send out a series of threatening letters pretending the amount to pay is constantly increasing in the hope of frightening the motorist into paying.  Eventually they will probably send a Letter of Claim which is the step before court action.  At that point we say to reply with a snotty letter showing them you'd be big trouble if they were daft enough to do court.  At that point they generally give up. 

But don't think they will ever formally back down.

And there are no guarantees.  If they never take anyone to court, ever, then word will get round that they are paper tigers.  NCP do do court.  Here is a search of our NCP threads.  You will say that the vast majority do not have "claimform" in the title - but some do  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/search/?q=NCP&quick=1&type=forums_topic&nodes=65&updated_after=any&sortby=relevancy&search_in=titles  You can make your own luck IYSWIM with the snotty letter, and given (a) POFA and (b) bye-laws they are unlikely to do court in your case.  Unlikely - but not impossible.

Returning to the SAR.  LFI's idea is excellent - but the pitfall is that if you go down that road then you have to be prepared to sue them.  What if they say no to your attempt at negotiation and continue?  Are you at that point going to issue a claimform for distress due to their failure to respect the SAR?  If the answer is "no" as seems the case then I don't think that's the strategy to follow.

I can't be sure, but I would guess that their staff, whose job is to send out the various levels of threatening letters at various intervals, are probably not the brightest bulbs in the box and didn't understand what the SAR was when it turned up, so chucked it in the bin.  But you've got NCP's attention now.  I would do what I suggested three posts up (I've amended the dates given you'll probably write on Monday now).  That would keep the heat on them and hopefully get them to respect the SAR.

[EssexChap]

7 hours ago, FTMDave said:

are probably not the brightest bulbs in the box and didn't understand what the SAR was when it turned up

 

I'm sure the data protection officer knows what a SAR is, even in a company as patently dodgy as NCP. I think they deliberately fail to act for self-preservation reasons and hope the requester backs off. 

The fact I received what was effectively a pro forma letter pretending they hadn't got our request only reinforces this belief. Especially as nobody in the company even puts their name on a letter.

(Interestingly, but not surprisingly) the BW Legal website is the only law firm's website I've ever seen that doesn't mention the name of a single employee! Every other normal law firm profiles the senior partners and often all the key front line staff!)

[Nicky Boy]

You're a quick learner Essex!

[lookinforinfo]

Let me introduce you to Sean and Rachel the directors.

BW LEGAL SERVICES LIMITED people - Find and update company information - GOV.UK

FIND-AND-UPDATE.COMPANY-INFORMATION.SERVICE.GOV.UK

---

BW LEGAL SERVICES LIMITED - Free company information from Companies House including registered office address, filing history, accounts, annual return, officers, charges, business activity