Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Plenty of success stories, also bear in mind not everyone updates the forum.  Overdale's want you to roll over and pay, without using your enshrined legal right to defend. make you wet yourself in fear that a solicitor will Take you to court, so you will pay up without question. Most people do just that,  but you are lucky that you have found this place and can help you put together a good defence. You should get reading on some other Capital One and Overdale's cases on the forum to get an idea of how it works.  
    • In both versions the three references to "your clients" near the end need to be changed to "you" or "your" as Alliance are not using solicitors, they have sent the LoC themselves. Personally I'd change "Dear ALLIANCE PARKING Litigation Dept" to "Dear Kev".  It would show you'd done your homework, looked up the company, and seen it's a pathetic one-man band rather than having any departments.  The PPCs love to pretend they have some official power and so you should be scared of them - showing you've sussed their sordid games and you're confident about fighting them undermines all this.  In fact that's the whole point of a snotty letter - to show you'd be big trouble for them if they did do court so better to drop you like a hot potato and go and pursue mugs who just give in instead. In the very, very, very, very unlikely case of Kev doing court, it'd be better that he didn't know in advance all the legal arguments you'd be using, so I'd heavily reduce the number of cards being played.
    • Thanx Londoneill get on to it this evening having a read around these forums I can’t seem to find many success stories using your methods. So how successful are these methods or am I just buying time for him  and a ccj will be inevitable in the end. Thanks another question is, will he have to appear at court..? I am not sure he has got it in him
    • Here's a suggested modified version for consideration by the team. (Not sure whether it still gives too much away?)   RE: PCN 4xxxxx Dear ALLIANCE PARKING Litigation Dept, Thank you for your dubious Letter Of Claim (dated 29th April 2024) of £100 for just 2 minutes of overstay. The family rolled around on the floor in amazement of the idea you actually think they’d accept this nonsense, let alone being confused over the extra unlawful £70 you added. Shall we raise the related VAT issue with HMRC, or perhaps the custodians of the unicorn grain silos? Apart from the serious GDPR breach you’ve made with the DVLA and your complete failure in identifying the driver, we’re dumbfounded that the PCN is still not compliant with the PoFA (2012 Schedule 4 Under Section 9.2.f) even after 12 years of pathetic trial and error. We also doubt a judge would be very impressed at your bone idleness and lack of due diligence regarding parking periods. Especially with no consideration of section 13 in your own trade association's code of practice and the topological nature of the Cornish landscape versus a traditional multi-storey. And don’t even get us started on the invisible signage during the ultra busy bank holiday carnage, that is otherwise known as the random parking chaos in the several unmarked, unmanaged over-spill fields, or indeed the tedious “frustration of contract” attempting to get a data connection to Justpark.  We suggest your clients drop this extreme foolishness or get an absolute hammering in court. We are more than ready to raise the above issues and more, with a fair minded judge, who will most likely laugh your clients out in less time than it takes to capture a couple of useless ANPR photos. If you insist on continuing this stupid, money grabbing quest, after having all of the above pointed out, we will of course show this letter to the Judge and request “an unreasonable costs order” under CPR 27.14.2.g and put it toward future taxis to Harlyn Bay instead.  We all look forward to your clients' deafening silence. Signed, "Spot". (Vehicle Keeper's pet Dalmation).
    • Paying DCA's one penny, never mind £50 per month is a mugs game, they have really been milking him as a cash cow   See where received a claim form is underlined in your post, you need to click, on that and read carefully, then answer the questions, then copy and paste into a post on this thread Forget the CAB ,  their advice is sometimes weird. Is it worth defending? Lowell brought these debts for 10 p in the pound , years ago, because they are flawed. Think about it! if it was such an easy win, Capital one could have taken it to court and crushed him.  It could be an invalid agreement, default notice, or many other things. In a nutshell , yes, and we can help you.
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Excel ANPR PCN Letter Of Claim - Appealed - Gallagher retail park, Huddersfield, HD5 0AN


Recommended Posts

I was pointed in the direction of this site

I have a Letter before claim.

Ive flown solo aside from my own efforts on Google and would have thought they would have gone away by now but still they come.

Hope you can help in any final response I give to the LBC. 

I think I've followed the instructions correctly.

Should I also attach  the LBC? TIA

1 Date of the infringement 26/11/2023

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] Unsure as disposed of it although it was within a few days

3 Date received Was within a few days

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

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes on entry and exit 13 minutes over the "permitted time". The photos show driving in and out. This is a busy car park and it can take 10-15 minutes to find a spot and exit

6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] Yes principle argument was I wasnt the driver. The driver was not happy for me to share their personal data however they were happy and i did submit bank statement showing the driver was a legitimate customer of 3 of the retailers at the retail park. The appeal was submitted on their website  I dont have a copy other than their response to it (included in bundle)

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

7 Who is the parking company? Excel Parking 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Gallagher retail park, Huddersfield, HD5 0AN

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

IAS - I didnt appeal any further although did write to them again with another template I found (cant recall from where - it could have been from here) as attached

 

Comms in-out.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks all.

If I out the driver Id still be the one dealing with it and paying any fines

I've defended myself successfully in a smalls claims court before with a 3rd party car insurance company

I don't mind going all they way .

LBC attached.

Ill get working on the snotty letter and post shortly.

Thanks again

 

2024-03-21 Excel PAPLOC.pdf

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Excel ANPR PCN Letter Of Claim - Appealed - Gallagher retail park, Huddersfield, HD5 0AN

Snotty Letter Draft 1:

Thank you for your Letter Before Claim

I am 2-0 up in terms of Small Claim Court Proceedings so I look forward to the opportunity to claim a Hat Trick, this being more straight forward than my previous two cases.

Thank you for also agreeing to the terms of my previous letter and please find enclosed my invoice for £50 which should be paid by cheque within 28 days of this letter.

I will be asking the court to consider the time I spend defending this absurd claim in line with the fees you have already agreed to.

Despite my best endeavours you still are of the belief I have breached your terms. I cannot breach terms that I was not present to accept.

Did you even read my initial response?

Maybe have another read and save yourself some money.

I look forward to your solicitor trying to settle with me in the waiting area before we go into the chambers. I will have my final invoice ready for them less any payments you have already made.

Yours faithfully

Xxxxxxxx

Enc – Invoice for processing of Letter Before Claim

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Sorry only just seen the message above.

I think there have always been restrictions but they have as i understand chopped and changed it.

For years it was 2 hours then I think they moved it to 3 hours and now it looks like they have reverted to 2.

2 hours is woefully insufficient if you are visiting several establishments on the site and then finishing with a Maccys.

Even more so when you consider how hard it is to access and egress on a Saturday or Sunday morning as the car park is not big enough so you a frequently waiting for a space to appear and then queuing to get out.

i have now received a letter from DCBL (Direct Collection Bailiffs Ltd). saying the same thing as Excel were saying i.e pay £170 or we will recommend Excel to take me to court.

The fact i have instructed them several times just to take me to court makes me believe they have no intention of taking me to court - they just think now asking another bully to shake me down will work.......

I can post the letter if you want me to but Im guessing the advice is to just ignore?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...