***HELP*** BW Legal FINAL NOTICE

@Lamilad Thank you I have made the amendments as advised. I hope this is now suffice. Would you advise using any of the facts mentioned in my opening post in my email to BW Legal denying the fine?

Lamilad wrote: »

I would send them a short but hard hitting letter denying the claim and letting them know that if they intend to pursue you they're in for a fight.

Normally newbies are advised to search the forum and read lots of other threads in order to put an appropriate response together [I hope in the very least you have read the 'newbies' thread]. This is important because if you end up with a court claim (and you probably will) you'll need the info from other threads to know what you're up against and how to prepare. Plus you'll need to become adept at navigating the forum, using the search function etc etc.

However, I'm gonna spoon feed you on this occasion (I needed to be spoon fed a few times, as CM will recall). I came across a letter by Gan on pepipoo written as a 'final notice' response to BWL. I've edited it and stuck a section 10 notice on the end.

Feel free to edit some more if you want or others may advise further, then when your ready send it to [EMAIL="enquiries@bwlegal.co.uk"]enquiries@bwlegal.co.uk[/EMAIL] putting the ref no. in the subject line.


"Dear BW Legal


Thank you for your letter dated ******** Ref: ***********

I deny any debt to Excel and will robustly defend any proceedings in court.

In your letter you refer to a previous letter dated 10th February (“the first letter”). I advise you that this has not been received. The above letter titled “Final Notice” is the only communication I have received from BW Legal in relation to this matter. I find it wholly unreasonable for you to suggest that I have not responded to a letter that I did not receive.

Had I received the letter I would have replied explaining why your client’s request for payment is without merit. As this is the first and only letter I have received from you I send this response to you now.

For your information, I was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question at that time; however I firmly assert that I was not the driver and in the event of legal proceedings, will make such an assertion under a Statement of Truth. Under the Protection of Freedom Act 2012, your client has chosen not to use the provisions to hold the registered keeper liable.

You may not rely on a selective reading and misrepresentation of Elliott v Loake to presume the contrary. The case of Elliot v Loake does not create any presumption of the identity of the driver - see case reference C8DP37F1, Stockport, 31/10/2016.

I note your attempt to mislead me regarding your £54 legal costs. As you are aware, these cannot be recovered in the Small Claims court. Please note that signage at the time did not make mention of any contractually agreed charge to this amount. I also note your misrepresentation of the consequences of an adverse judgement.
You are in breach of Chapter 11 of the Solicitors Code of Conduct.
I refer you specifically to Indicative Behaviours IB 11.7 and 11.8

TAKE NOTICE: If you persist in this course of action, I will report BW Legal to the CSA and SRA.

You should consider this a Section 10 Notice which gives you 21 days to respond or I will make a complaint to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). Further, if you and/or your client continue to process my data I will seek damages for distress for this continued data protection contravention. Vidal-Hall v Google [2014] EWHC 13 (QB) establishes that misuse of personal data is a tort and that damages for a breach of the DPA could include non-pecuniary damage. The case of Halliday v Creation Consumer Finance Ltd [2013] All ER (D) 199 provides authority that a reasonable sum for compensation would be £750 so you may consider yourselves and your clients on notice of my intention and the distressing effects on me, of your data mishandling.

I trust this clarifies that the parking charge and your administration and/or debt recovery charges are none of my concern. Please refer the matter back to your client. As your client has no legal reason to pursue the registered keeper in this case I now consider this matter closed. Do not contact me again save to confirm your compliance with the section 10 notice.”

I think frustration of contract may also be relevant in your case but as none of the others have mentioned I haven't put anything in the letter. If it is relevant it may be best saved for your court defence anyway.

Coupon-mad wrote: »

IMHO it is only worthwhile mentioning this fact - but why is that, are they going to an old address?


I repeat - DO NOT tip them off about the fact the PCN contravention doesn't match what they are saying...you do not want to give them the chance to put their house in order.

My signature tells you how to navigate the forum and find the NEWBIES thread. Read the second post of it.

Redx wrote: »

they only need to act as a contractor for the landholder, there is no requirement for EXCEL to own the land and generally speaking very few of these companies own the land , they are supposed to act on behalf of the landholder, just the same as the cleaning company that may clean the toilets or the catering company that provides the food

so to be clear, they do not have to "own the land" at any stage , now or 3 years ago or even 10 years ago

but they DO have to have a contract with the landholder , or one that "flows" through to them through a managing agent on behalf of the landholder , so there could be several contracts that ultimately start with the landholder and end with excel having some authority to act , which will be subject to the terms and conditions of the contract , plus another one allowing B W LEGAL to act on their behalf

this is contract law, not parking per se , so who owns the land may not matter as long as the correct contracts are in place

try reading the lamilad court cases and outcomes for a start , it may help your understandings

Alrighty, I have received a response from BW Legal to my email which I sent in response to the first letter I received from them. The letter I have received dated 5 April 2017 is as follows;


Dear Sir


Our Client: Excel Parking Services Ltd
Account Number: XXXXXXXXXX
Balance: £154.00


We write in reference to the above matter and confirm Our Client's position below.


Excels claim is for the sum of £154.00 and is in relation to monies (and legal expenses) owed pursuant to the PCN.


The PCN contravention (as stated on the PCN) occurred on XX XXXX 2014 at Middlesbrough Leisure Park ("the car park"), where the vehicle bearing registration number XXXX XXX parked in a restricted area of the car park.


We enclose photographic evidence of the contravention and copy of PCN.


We also wish to draw to your attention that you were previously allowed 28 days from the date you received the PCN to dispute the PCN and/or appeal the PCN through an independent appeal service.
Both of these options have now expired and your recourse for dispute is through the County Court process, which could increase your liability further.


In order to prevent further costs from being incurred we would be grateful if you would contact us within 14 days from the date of this letter to pay the Balance.


In the event you are unable to pay the Balance in full, please contact our helpful team, on the details above, to discuss our suitable payment options.


We look forward to hearing from you within 14 days.