Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Lamilad
    • By Lamilad 14th Jun 16, 12:05 AM
    • 1,056Posts
    • 2,115Thanks
    Lamilad
    Court Claim. BW Legal on behalf of Excel Parking
    • #1
    • 14th Jun 16, 12:05 AM
    Court Claim. BW Legal on behalf of Excel Parking 14th Jun 16 at 12:05 AM
    PLEASE HELP!

    I have received county court claim forms from Northampton County Court for an un paid PCN. The claimant is Excel Parking Services LTD. The "address for sending documents and payments" is stated as BW Legal.

    Particulars of Claim:
    The claimants claim is for the sum of £100 being monies due from the defendant to the claimant in respect of a parking charge notice (PCN) is on 25/07/2015 (issue date) at XX:XX:XX at XXXXXXXXX Retail Park XXXXXXXX.
    The PCN relates to XXXXXXX under registration XXXXXXX.
    The terms of the PCN allowed the defendant 28 days from the issue date to pay the PCN, but the defendant failed to do so.
    Despite demand having been made, the defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability.
    The claim also includes statutory interest pursuant to section 69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum a daily rate of 0.02 from 25/07/2015 to 26/05/2016 being an amount of £6.14.
    The claimant also claims £54.00 contractual costs pursuant to PCN terms and conditions

    Amount claimed: £160.14
    Court fee: £25.00
    Legal representatives costs: £50.00
    Total amount: £235.14

    Background:
    I do not have any specific recollection of this occurrence. I use this car park regularly as does my wife - who also drives my car. Other family members also use my car. I usually pay for my parking but I know I have forgotten on occasion to buy a ticket and I have received other PCN letters from Excel and BW legal.
    Following out of date advice I have always ignored all correspondence and chucked all letters in the bin. From reading the Newbies, and other threads on this forum I know I am a complete idiot for doing this so no need to point that out.

    So Far:
    I have completed the AOS on MCOL and stated that I intend to defend all of the claim. I have also contacted BMPA. They have said I need to write a defense and they will help me refine it. They said the defense will likely be vague as they rarely provide enough information and I should explain it's vague as I haven't been given enough detail. The next stage, they said, is to write a witness statement (but it might not get that far)

    Here's where I'm a bit stuck. I don't know where to start with my defense and/or witness statement. I've spent the last few hours reading loads of threads inc the newbies thread so I have a few ideas about points my defense should include but that's about it. I can't seem to find any threads that are a close match for my experience so if anyone can point me in the direction of one that would be much appreciated. I confess I'm very tired after a long day so I'm struggling to take all the info in.

    From what I can gather my defense should include the following points:
    * As Excel parking is not the land owner they do not have the right to bring a claim against me
    * the claim is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss - although I have read that this may not be a valid defense since the Beavis case
    * The £54.00 contractual cost is unenforceable
    * The contract is not valid as I could not have known the full terms and conditions before parking.
    * The detail on the signage on entry to and within the car park is too small to properly read and understand while driving (it really is, I have pics)
    ... I'm sure there's loads of other stuff too which is where I need guidance.

    I'm going to do some more research tomorrow and start drafting my defense. I will post on here when ready but I would really appreciate some pointers to get me started and if possible so example words/ sentences/ paragraphs.

    Many thanks in advance. From reading some threads I think it's amazing that the people on here are willing to share their time and knowledge to help the ordinary man/ woman against these PPC scoundrels
Page 8
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 20th Nov 16, 10:35 AM
    • 6,183 Posts
    • 7,915 Thanks
    beamerguy
    In terms of court cases, possibly not. But we don't get involved in every such court case - in fact only two, Lamilad's fantastic win, and (if genuine) JJ's loss. Now that looks to me to be a rather thin sample on which to make such statements.

    But their overall strategy is debt collection, with the threat of litigation to back it up. One or two notable court scalps no doubt would have been stuck on pikes in subsequent threatograms to the unwary to ramp up the pressure.

    So has this overall strategy 'simply not worked'? I think I'd be a little more circumspect in proclaiming that. I suspect it's working rather well and at the mkoment it's rather like a Las Vegas casino over at 91 Kirkstall Road.
    Originally posted by Umkomaas
    I have to agree with you in that we simply don't know how many people just pay up without a fight. The majority of people are savvy enough to ask questions via google and Excel/BWLegal seem to be going up the charts right now.

    It is only a few months ago that BWLegal sent out their mega scam mail, so this is the time we will hear about the court cases as we are now.
    BWLegal are running on a "one way claim ticket", they have shown their cards and the clever people on the forums will make sure it stays that way.

    Due to their highly flawed claims the courts can block any claims just like they did with the PPI scam.

    Personally, within my circle which is pretty big, nobody has heard of BWLegal so I do not think this has reached a Las Vegas style.

    Whether or not BWLegal wish to be ridiculed in court is up to them and as we have now reached the time when this is happening, I am certain will hear more and more about their failures
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • Northlakes
    • By Northlakes 20th Nov 16, 11:09 AM
    • 821 Posts
    • 1,155 Thanks
    Northlakes
    @Lamilad

    Ever thought about being a lawyer, that is brilliant, congrats.

    I see no reason why the same cannot be used in all BWLegal timewasting rubbish.

    Excel should think carefully about any future "try on's" as this will cost them money by using such a poor solicitor

    Maybe you should advise the SRA which confirms the predatory tactics used by BWLegal in an attempt to extort money

    Let us hope that the court system now recognises that these firms are wasting court time and only using them as a cash cow
    Originally posted by beamerguy
    You could argue that the solicitor was extorting money from his client, who he/she should have a professional duty of care, particularly in these cases where POFA hasn't been applied and the keeper is not the driver.
    • trisontana
    • By trisontana 20th Nov 16, 12:29 PM
    • 8,938 Posts
    • 13,660 Thanks
    trisontana
    Looking at the company that employs Mr. P, it looks as though they are fairly new to the game. Their actual name is ELMS Legal (incorporated in 2014) but for some reason they call themselves ELMS Legal Ltd. 2016. Why the two names?

    They are based about half a mile from where I live. They don't have their own office, but just rent some space in the Northgate Business Centre in Newark where you can rent offices by the month.
    What part of "A whop bop-a-lu a whop bam boo" don't you understand?
    • Lamilad
    • By Lamilad 20th Nov 16, 12:44 PM
    • 1,056 Posts
    • 2,115 Thanks
    Lamilad
    Looking at the company that employs Mr. P, it looks as though they are fairly new to the game. Their actual name is ELMS Legal (incorporated in 2014) but for some reason they call themselves ELMS Legal Ltd. 2016. Why the two names?

    They are based about half a mile from where I live. They don't have their own office, but just rent some space in the Northgate Business Centre in Newark where you can rent offices by the month.
    Originally posted by trisontana

    I wonder if they're a subsidiary of excel. ELMS could stand for Excel Litigation Management Services or something like that... Just a thought
    • trisontana
    • By trisontana 20th Nov 16, 1:05 PM
    • 8,938 Posts
    • 13,660 Thanks
    trisontana
    According to Companies House the company has just one director (not Mr P) and changed its name from "Landlords Lawyer" in 2015. It used to be based in Boreham Wood, Herts.
    What part of "A whop bop-a-lu a whop bam boo" don't you understand?
    • Castle
    • By Castle 20th Nov 16, 2:53 PM
    • 1,283 Posts
    • 1,671 Thanks
    Castle
    ELMS Legal Ltd is regulated for Civil Litigation and Advocacy under number 2164466 by the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives ("CILEx"). They only have one Practitioner, (the sole Director):-
    http://www.cilex.org.uk/about-cilex-lawyers/cilex-practitioners-directory
    • yotmon
    • By yotmon 20th Nov 16, 3:58 PM
    • 459 Posts
    • 649 Thanks
    yotmon
    Apologies for coming to the party late - but well done !

    Having read all this thread, especially the details of what happened in court, I find it rather ridiculous that a 'defendant' has to almost obtain a degree in law to defend an alleged parking contravention that occurred outside their own home.

    I think that once your cases are finally dealt with, then your case files showing how much work you have had to endure to defend these cases should be sent to Prime Minister May, to show how absurd the whole sham has become.

    At least when we had clamping, they either caught you on the day and that was the end of it, it certainly wasn't hanging over you for the next 6 years !
    • trisontana
    • By trisontana 20th Nov 16, 4:32 PM
    • 8,938 Posts
    • 13,660 Thanks
    trisontana
    This once again highlights the total misuse and hijacking of the Small Claims Court by PPCs and their debt collectors. I seem to remember that when the SCC was first introduced it was for the ordinary person in the street to get cheap justice without having to employ costly lawyers.

    Now it's being used as a way of hammering that person who probably has very little (if any) law training. On the other side you have the PPC bully-boys who employ legally trained people to fight their case. One sided or not?
    What part of "A whop bop-a-lu a whop bam boo" don't you understand?
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 20th Nov 16, 6:57 PM
    • 15,005 Posts
    • 23,583 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    This once again highlights the total misuse and hijacking of the Small Claims Court by PPCs and their debt collectors. I seem to remember that when the SCC was first introduced it was for the ordinary person in the street to get cheap justice without having to employ costly lawyers.

    Now it's being used as a way of hammering that person who probably has very little (if any) law training. On the other side you have the PPC bully-boys who employ legally trained people to fight their case. One sided or not?
    Originally posted by trisontana
    Have you also noticed that hardly ever does a PPC representative turn up at the court (proper bully boy tactic to hide when the bullied one fights back)? Although Bouncy Kev did show up the other day, only to get his nose bloodied by his own counsel, Gladstones. Karma, or what?
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • Molts
    • By Molts 15th Jan 17, 12:20 AM
    • 67 Posts
    • 161 Thanks
    Molts
    Careful what anyone writes on the forum as Excel has permission to add selected postings to their documents for the hearing for the second case on 11/1/17
    Do we know how Excel vs Lamilad Part 2 went?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 15th Jan 17, 12:44 AM
    • 50,789 Posts
    • 64,192 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Do we know how Excel vs Lamilad Part 2 went?
    Originally posted by Molts
    I am sure Lamilad will update when decided...I know he went off forum and had BMPA assistance.

    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • eightdip
    • By eightdip 25th Jan 17, 4:26 PM
    • 1 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    eightdip
    Hi all,

    Just wanted to post in here as I had a very similar situation to the original poster in that BW legal were chasing me in reference to an unpaid Excel Parking services PCN.

    They didn't originally post the PCN within the 14 day period required by PoFA 2012 and the case went to court with that as my main defence. It was judged that as I hadn't said at any point who the driver of the vehicle was, it was reasonable to suggest that I was the driver and thus PoFA did not apply to the case as that act is apparently only applicable for the Registered Keeper.

    IMPORTANTLY however, the judge did add that if I had at any point in my original defence (whether on appeal to Excel or at point of court proceedings) said that I was not the driver at the time, I would have won the case. By me not saying one way or another, I was destined for a loss.

    My personal advice would be to say you weren't the driver throughout the case, but not offer them an alternate driver. Simply state "I was not the driver at the time". That way the claimant can only chase you as a keeper and so has to abide by PoFA 2012. In my case they would have lost as they were late sending the PCN.

    Hope this helps someone, I know everything is pretty case by case but I'm sure there are others in my situation.

    Unfortunately I only found this thread after having submitted my witness statement so could not rely on using the quote from Henry Greenslade as used in the OP's case.
    • cleb1
    • By cleb1 21st Mar 17, 1:42 PM
    • 4 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    cleb1
    FOA Coupon Mad
    Hi Coupon mad, I wonder if you could help me. I've got a case in a fortnight and I note that you raised no evidence of 'failure to pay and display' by the unknown driver.


    I'm being really dumb here but can you please elaborate on how they would adduce evidence of failure to pay and display? Do you mean a list of all payments made at the time of entry on the ticket (and therefore evidence that the VR in question was missing?).


    Also regarding POFA, I was the registered keeper but not the driver. I have said this in my defence and witness statement and quoted Greenslade. Non-compliance with schedule 4 is one of my main defences.


    I note that people have said that Excel either need to identify the driver or if not, serve a POFA compliant notice to keeper. I have quoted sections 6 and 9 of schedule, i.e. there has been a breach of 9(2)(b) which states that "the notice must inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking" I have stated that this is impossible, since they have not identified the driver. I have also highlighted a breach of 9(2)(c) which states that the notice must "describe the parking charges due from the driver, the circumstances in which the requirement to pay arose (including the means by which the requirement was brought to the attention of the driver". There was no mention of how the requirement to pay was brought to the driver's attention, therefore I have stated that this has been breached. Finally, 9 (2)(e) stated that the notice must state that "the creditor does not know the name of the driver and a current address for service of the driver". This too has been breached. However, I suspect that they will say how would they identify individual drivers and know the difference between who is the registered keeper/driver and currently I don't have a response to this?


    I have quite a lot more info in my statement and am happy with arguing that, but am a bit hazy on these two points.


    Can coupon mad or anybody else assist please?


    I am being quite vague on here and not typing exact copies of my witness statement as ~I note that Excel may be reading.


    Thanks,
    • Lamilad
    • By Lamilad 21st Mar 17, 2:24 PM
    • 1,056 Posts
    • 2,115 Thanks
    Lamilad
    Can coupon mad or anybody else assist please?

    Thanks,
    Originally posted by cleb1
    Why are you posting on here rather than your own thread?
    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5506858

    Posting across threads is poor forum etiquette. Plus you won't get the answers you need as the regulars:
    A) Can't see the background to your case
    B) Won't respond to questions on 'hijacked' threads

    CM mainly posts late afternoon/evening. Lookout for when she's active (posting on the forum) then bump your thread. I'm sure she will help you.
    • Lamilad
    • By Lamilad 21st Mar 17, 2:41 PM
    • 1,056 Posts
    • 2,115 Thanks
    Lamilad
    Hi all,

    Just wanted to post in here as I had a very similar situation to the original poster in that BW legal were chasing me in reference to an unpaid Excel Parking services PCN.

    They didn't originally post the PCN within the 14 day period required by PoFA 2012 and the case went to court with that as my main defence. It was judged that as I hadn't said at any point who the driver of the vehicle was, it was reasonable to suggest that I was the driver and thus PoFA did not apply to the case as that act is apparently only applicable for the Registered Keeper.

    IMPORTANTLY however, the judge did add that if I had at any point in my original defence (whether on appeal to Excel or at point of court proceedings) said that I was not the driver at the time, I would have won the case. By me not saying one way or another, I was destined for a loss.

    My personal advice would be to say you weren't the driver throughout the case, but not offer them an alternate driver. Simply state "I was not the driver at the time". That way the claimant can only chase you as a keeper and so has to abide by PoFA 2012. In my case they would have lost as they were late sending the PCN.

    Hope this helps someone, I know everything is pretty case by case but I'm sure there are others in my situation.

    Unfortunately I only found this thread after having submitted my witness statement so could not rely on using the quote from Henry Greenslade as used in the OP's case.
    Originally posted by eightdip
    Hi eightdip, such a shame you didn't find the forum sooner. With forum help 99% of cases are won against Excel/VCS/BW Legal.

    The judge erred in your case and clearly doesn't have a good understanding of pofa/ keeper liability. It doesn't matter whether you know you weren't the driver or if you can't remember. Without pofa compliance the claimant has to prove you were the driver or at least put forward a very convincing argument to make the judge believe that on the 'balance of probabilities' (BoP) you were the driver.

    The burden of proof always lies with the claimant. It is not for the defendant to prove they were not the driver. In some cases defendants have won by not even submitting evidence but simply holding Excel to strict proof as to who was driving.
    http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/excel-lose-at-sheffield-elliot-v-loake.html

    If the claimant cannot rely on pofa then they CANNOT hold the RK liable. Henry Greenslade's comment may have convinced the judge that no 'assumptions' can be made'.... and if you'd adduced my transcript it could have been persuasive.
    • Bigboy351
    • By Bigboy351 11th Oct 17, 6:12 PM
    • 1 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Bigboy351
    Parking Fines
    Hi gents just wondering if Parking companies not complying with a 14 day notification on an parking overstay is a legitimate reason for winning a case?
    • waamo
    • By waamo 11th Oct 17, 6:45 PM
    • 2,063 Posts
    • 2,475 Thanks
    waamo
    Hi gents just wondering if Parking companies not complying with a 14 day notification on an parking overstay is a legitimate reason for winning a case?
    Originally posted by Bigboy351
    You need to do 2 things. 1 is to read the thread at the top of the forum that tells Newbies to read it first. Then 2 start your own thread for advice.
    This space for hire.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

213Posts Today

1,542Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @LordsEconCom: On Tuesday Martin Lewis, Hannah Morrish & Shakira Martin gave evidence to the Cttee. Read the full transcript here: https?

  • Ta ta for now. Half term's starting, so I'm exchanging my MoneySavingExpert hat for one that says Daddy in big letters. See you in a week.

  • RT @thismorning: Can @MartinSLewis' deals save YOU cash? ???? https://t.co/igbHCwzeiN

  • Follow Martin