Highview/DCB(L) ANPR PCN - Letter of Claim - Now Claimform - overstay - Riverside Retail Park in Norwich, Norfolk.

[anotheruser0000]

1 Date of the infringement 08/08/23

 

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 17/08/2023
 

3 Date received Unknown
 

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] Yes
 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes
 

6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] No
 

Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up N/A
 

7 Who is the parking company? Highview Parking

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Riverside Retail Park Norwich
 

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under.

BPA

 

Hello,

I have received a PCN from Highview Parking who manage Riverside Retail Park in Norwich, Norfolk.

The free period is 2h30m and it is alleged the vehicle was onsite for 2h45m, therefore a claim is being made by Highview for a 15 minute overstay.

Please find attached correspondence received from the various entities involved. I have not appealed nor had any contact with any of the entities involved.

As this has escalated to a Letter of Claim dated 12 February 2024 I would be grateful for any advice given.

I think I've done this right please let me know if any other information is required.

 

Many Thanks,

 

au0000

 

Highview Parking PCN.pdf

[anotheruser0000]

Hi,

 

Thanks for the replies, I did initially upload the letters, please let me know if you are unable to see them and I will do it again and yes, it is a letter of claim, the last letter in the pdf.

 

hi, dx, last 2 pages of pdf, PAPLOC, not sure what that means, I am new and still reading up on stuff

[anotheruser0000]

Hi Dave,

Thanks for your reply, should I send the letter to Highview and a copy to DCBL or to Highview only?

Looking through some threads for an example letter, is there a template?

Will continue researching the forum to see what I can find but thank you everyone for your help so far.

au0000

Edit: OK, found a page on ericsbrother letters, thanks dx100uk on another post

[anotheruser0000]

Hi Everyone,

Thanks very much for the replies and all the help so far.

Been short on time and had internet problems but hoping to get this sorted today.

@lookinforinfo When you said they didn't comply with Section 9(2)(e), they didn't quote the section but did state on the PCN "as we do not know the drivers details or current postal address,  if you were not the driver at the time" etc etc.

Does that not comply with the statement under (e) ?

So, reading through the act:

(2)The notice must—

(a) specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;

As you say, they have specified a "duration of stay" and not a period of parking.

Just working out a letter at the moment.

 

Thanks.

[anotheruser0000]

Ah, yes, I won't be referring to any of that in the letter, I was just wondering that point while I construct my letter.

 

Thanks.

[anotheruser0000]

Hi Everyone,

 

I was thinking of keeping the SL short and simple, something like this:

 

Dear TV Stars, (and Highview)

In response to your Letter of Claim

Re: PCN no.XXXXX

 

How delightful it is to receive examples of your attempts to fleece motorists and patrons of various businesses.

Your persistence truly is commendable, albeit misguided.

Firstly, I must express my sincere gratitude for your contribution to my entertainment fund.

Your pennies have been put to excellent use in providing me with endless chuckles.

However, your belief that you are owed anything beyond that is as laughable as it is absurd.

You quote parts of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 but have you actually read the act in whole?

If you haven't I suggest you do so now as it might save you a few quid in court.

Take a look at your own Code of Practice as well, while you're at it.

In conclusion, allow me to offer my sincerest wishes: may this be the last we hear from each other because at this time of year, the money I spent on the stamp could have been put towards a visit from the Easter Bunny!

With the warmest regards (not really),

anotheruser0000

 

 

 

[anotheruser0000]

Thank you Nicky Boy

And thanks for the earlier posting of the guide to acronyms, most helpful

[anotheruser0000]

Thank you FTM Dave,

I have to credit the author of the original letter on this forum that I "borrowed" from and inspired my letter, which was you, lol!

We can split the prize for Letter of The Year!

I can do the letter to Riverside, unfortunately I don't have any proof of purchase to enclose but I was at Riverside the whole time, nothing ventured and all that.

By my calculations I've still got ten days to reply so I will get to the Post Office in a day or two.

[anotheruser0000]

Yes, after reading through the act and reading again their letters and with your clarification, I can clearly see that.

As you say, a Major fail on their part.

 

Thank you.

[anotheruser0000]

Hi All,

I was going to post an update after a month had passed since I sent my SN but didn't get around to it,

after about two weeks I received a letter from Highview letting me know the opportunity to appeal had been missed, Shame, lol! ....

On Sat 13th (the 13th! Aaarggghh! ) I received a Claim Form from DCB(L) .... seems they wish to pursue the matter through the courts!

These people really are tiresome ....

Details to follow ....

(EDIT: just noticed this is the 13th post as well! .... not that I'm superstitious, lol! )

[anotheruser0000]

Hi Dave,

I must admit I didn't end up sending a letter to the retail park but that's OK, I'm not bothered about getting it cancelled,

I really don't mind my day in court, I've been busy reading up on various acts and other sources, some fascinating stuff,

I'm not going to mention anything here at the moment in case they have spies but I think they may be doing something that doesn't comply with the relevant laws and/or guidelines at Riverside,

I don't want to give them any ammo or chance to rectify their mistakes.

I must also say that after spending time reading here I have great admiration for all the forum helpers who help everyone with their incredible knowledge on these legal matters.

Thank you to all of you.

I will post up my redacted Claim Form shortly.

[anotheruser0000]

Hi dx,

I didn't want to mention yet until I read further and did some investigation.

here is my redacted claim form.

Will the other info Dave mentioned still be required?

 

Thanks

Redacted Claim Form 2.pdf

[anotheruser0000]

Ah OK, I will work through it and get it posted up shortly.

I read somewhere else that these PPC's can get things done retrospectively and manage to thwart a defense by doing so, that was all.

 

Cheers.

[anotheruser0000]

Yes, I read that, that's what prompted me to think of not mentioning it here yet.

This is what I was referring to earlier, seems credible, if anyone was interested: (although I don't want to stray of topic )

At the final hearing in 2016 at the Bolton County Court we relied, you might think unwisely, on a defence that the signage was illegal. 

ParkingEye’s Claims Handler, David Greenbank, although not attending the hearing, had submitted a Skeleton Argument containing a claim that they had been granted planning permission for the signs retrospectively.

The judge found in favour of ParkingEye and anyway we had run out of time and he was anxious to move on to the next case (back-to-back parking cases). 

We had evidence to prove our case, but weren’t allowed to present it.

Parking Prankster: The great private car park planning approval scam (parking-prankster.blogspot.com)

 

 

[anotheruser0000]

Which Court have you received the claim from ? CIVIL NATIONAL BUSINESS CENTRE

Name of the Claimant ?  HIGHVIEW PARKING LIMITED

How many defendant's Joint or Self? SELF

Date of issue –  11 APR 2024

 

Particulars of Claim
 

1. The Defendant (D) is indebted to the Claimant (C) for a parking charge(s) issued to vehicle xxxx xxx at Riverside Retail Park A.

2. The PCN(S) were issued on 08/08/2023

3. The defendant is pursued as the driver of the vehicle for breach of the terms on the signs (the contract). Reason: Vehicle Remained On Private Property in Breach Of The Prominently displayed Terms And Conditions.

4. In the alternative the defendant is pursued as the keeper pursuant to POFA 2012, Schedule 4.

   AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS

1. £140 being the total of the PCN(s) and damages.

2. Interest at a rate of 8% per annum pursuant to s.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 from the date hereof at a daily rate of £.02 until judgement or sooner payment.

3. Costs and court fees

What is the total value of the claim?  £231.51

Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ?  Letter of Claim dated 12 Feb 2024

Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred?  NO

....................

Lol!

Yes, lookinforinfo,  I picked up on the word "Must" ....

As you say, they have not done what they legally "Must" do

I'm going to buy the Dummies Guide to Law and see if DCB(L) will give me a job

I'm also looking forward to CPR 27.1(1)(b)  

Edited April 15 by anotheruser0000

[anotheruser0000]

They'll need CPR when they see my CPR claim!  

 

[anotheruser0000]

Hi Dave,

Yep ....

Will have to do AOS tomorrow ....

Are you referring to CPR 31.14 Request?

[anotheruser0000]

Ah, OK .... was just making sure he wasn't referring to my  unreasonable Outrageous costs order under CPR 27.1(1)(b).

 

OK, both will be done and posted/submitted tomorrow.

 

[anotheruser0000]

Hehe ....

Alliance/ Letter of Claim - appealed - Promenade Car Park Perranporth - Private Land Parking Enforcement - Consumer Action Group

AoS   -   Submitted and Confirmed

CPR 31.14   -   Will be done and in the post before the end of the day today.

Thanks All.

[anotheruser0000]

CPR 31.14 drafted,

a question though, why is there a copyright? symbol next to CPR 31.15?

In accordance with CPR 31.15© I undertake to be responsible for your reasonable copying costs incurred in complying with this CPR 31.14 request.

Also, can I add ANPR CCTV cameras to point 2. T&C Planning 2007 or will etc suffice?

I have decided that I'm also going to make a complaint to the Land Owner,

thanks  lookinforinfo for land owner details.

 

.

[anotheruser0000]

OK, thanks, I won't wait for them.

On a side note, some of the posts on here are a bit frustrating, I read through five pages or so of someone going through the court process rooting for them as I'm reading, then nothing, not heard of again.

Left here wondering what the outcome was, lol!

[anotheruser0000]

OMG! I Know! .... someone here with a chance to sue Highview for breach of GDPR with a very good chance of winning, I was excited reading it especially after all the work put in by site members and thinking he could hammer them for £££'s and then, the OP disappeared half way through.

Although you never know the reason so all I can say is I hope the OP is alive and well regardless.

I'd relish the chance to do them for that if they breached my GDPR.

[anotheruser0000]

Hi All,

I know we are supposed to file the standard defence but I was thinking of adding the following to see if it would deter DCBL from continuing as this point I believe is irrefutable?

7. In any case, the alleged period of overstay falls within the consideration and grace periods outlined in government legislation and the governing body code of practice and therefore cannot be considered to be in breach of any terms and conditions set forth by the claimant.

What do you think?

 

[anotheruser0000]

Yep, I agree with what you are saying, I only mentioned the governing body code of practice as a nod to the fact that I wasn't dismissing the BPA or whoever out of hand, thought that would go in my favour before a judge. I wrote a long post about the BPA CoP earlier but then deleted it because I realised I wasn't talking about points of law but a set of guidelines drawn up by one bunch of charlatans for another bunch of charlatans.

It is ludicrous that the 5 minute consideration period doesn't apply if the motorist parks, such nonsense.

As for legislation, I was referring to the government legislation (if it is legislation?) document which has been withdrawn.

Does that stand until it has been reintroduced?

In the explanatory document it is quite clear. Otherwise, how does one hold them to the consideration and grace periods?

Or is that at the discretion of the judge?

[anotheruser0000]

Yes, I understand that but I thought, given that's a strong point, they might decide to discontinue and it might not go any further.

Not that I'm bothered about going to court, it's just that I don't get anything out of it if I do.

I propose a new rule. If the defendant wins, the claimant should have to award the defendant the sum of costs they were seeking.

Which in my case is £140 thank you very much.

Then it would be worthwhile and they might think twice about pursuing through the courts, lol!   

Edited April 20 by anotheruser0000