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
    • Fixtrace6
    • By Fixtrace6 1st Aug 16, 5:21 PM
    • 40Posts
    • 46Thanks
    Fixtrace6
    4year old pcn at JLA and MCOL?
    • #1
    • 1st Aug 16, 5:21 PM
    4year old pcn at JLA and MCOL? 1st Aug 16 at 5:21 PM
    I have received a letter from Vehicle Control Services telling me that "Your account has been passed to our legal team". That legal team is BW Legal.
    I received a pcn in early 2012 at Liverpool Airport. The advice has always been ignore because it happened before October 2012 when new rules came into play.
    I mentioned this on another thread and was advised to start my own thread.
    Originally I was posting in solidarity with someone who is still being hassled after 5 years but someone mentioned they may try MCOL. I looked it up but am not sure what it means.
    I was not driving the car at the time and I know I do not have to give up that information but this MCOL has got my curiosity.
    Has anyone else been recently contacted about a really old pcn? Is it more scraping the bottom of the barrel?
Page 3
    • Fixtrace6
    • By Fixtrace6 12th Sep 16, 11:10 PM
    • 40 Posts
    • 46 Thanks
    Fixtrace6
    Thanks Herzlos, I added the bit about having some bearing here.
    I am still reading around and have some general questions if anyone is interested in satisfying my curiosity (forewarned is forearmed).
    Do you receive a 'letter before claim' before mcol or can they just send one without warning?
    If you do receive a 'letter before claim' does it need to have a 'statement of truth' included for it to be a proper one?
    Could I make a 'statement of truth' saying I was not driving? If so, who would need to sign it? I am just thinking that would kill this claim of theirs.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 13th Sep 16, 12:01 AM
    • 41,803 Posts
    • 53,953 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Do you receive a 'letter before claim' before mcol or can they just send one without warning?
    You get a LBC first, but we are aware of cases where BW Legal have followed the LBC pretty much immediately with a boiler-plate claim without waiting for a reply to the LBC. Hence all the complaints flying in to the CSA and SRA, these are 'robo-claims' in bulk with no scrutiny, abusing the court process as a very cheap form of intimidatory debt collection.

    If you do receive a 'letter before claim' does it need to have a 'statement of truth' included for it to be a proper one?
    Nope.

    Could I make a 'statement of truth' saying I was not driving? If so, who would need to sign it?
    Yes; you would sign it and could tell BW Legal that you will include such a witness statement in defence, if they proceed.

    Unlikely to kill the claim though. Complaints to the SRA and CSA might do, and will certainly delay them for weeks.
    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the breadcrumb trail, top of page: Household & Travel > Motoring > Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking & READ THE 'NEWBIES' FAQS THREAD.
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Fixtrace6
    • By Fixtrace6 13th Sep 16, 6:17 PM
    • 40 Posts
    • 46 Thanks
    Fixtrace6
    Thanks Coupon Mad. Just when you think you have grasped something some other thing pops up. I read that about lbc needing to have statement of truth on pepipoo but maybe they were at a different stage. It mentioned CPR 22 and not being a proper lba without it.
    I haven't complained to csa or sra yet as I have been just batting back their letters with a bit of my own attack. I will complain, depending on their next response. Actually I will complain anyway.
    But I want to get this bit straight about a statement of truth. Is it something that needs to be drawn up by a solicitor or can I write out a statement and sign it. Would it have to be co-signed by a professional person? Do I just say to lbw that I have made one or should I send them a copy of the statement?
    I am assuming another letter is coming soon from the evidence online. And I think some people may have given in as some threads have gone dead. Or maybe we are all at the same stage and waiting for the mcol or court summons.... or maybe bwl have given up on some cases.
    Anyway, I will not give this up. If necessary I will spend the money they want on a legitimate solicitor to defend this. I am actually prepared to spend more than that. I do not want my money going to such unscrupulous people.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 14th Sep 16, 1:29 PM
    • 41,803 Posts
    • 53,953 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    But I want to get this bit straight about a statement of truth. Is it something that needs to be drawn up by a solicitor or can I write out a statement and sign it. Would it have to be co-signed by a professional person? Do I just say to lbw that I have made one or should I send them a copy of the statement?
    You can write one and sign it, no need for a solicitor. You could attach it to an email telling them this will be included in evidence if they proceed.

    If necessary I will spend the money they want on a legitimate solicitor to defend this. I am actually prepared to spend more than that. I do not want my money going to such unscrupulous people.
    You will not be able to reclaim solicitors' costs in small claims and we don't know of any who would be familiar with the POFA and specifics of private parking - you will get the best knowledge on the forums TBH, even though we say it ourselves.

    Why not tell Theresa May and Sir Oliver Heald how intimidated and unnerved you feel re this baseless 'charge', as suggested in this threads below? Now is the time to complain to the top, seeing as the Government are looking to be waking up to this scam.

    Ask them why it is fair that you have such a threat hanging over you, which could affect your credit through no fault of yours and based upon no 'credit' or CCA matter at all, not a real debt at all.

    Make it clear this is about a false, baseless made-up charge by a notorious ex-clamping firm owned by 'Captain Clampit' (the earlier nickname of the now rich fat cat Simon Renshaw-Smith, of BPA board fame). Tell them that VCS and Excel are now on a feeding frenzy, with THOUSANDS of template claims, some even sent to people's old addresses after 5 or even 6 years, courtesy of BW Legal's 'roboclaims' (BW Legal being a firm known to currently be under some level of investigation by both the SRA and the CSA):

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5524754

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=71294781#post71294781

    Go for it. Strike now. I suggest letters sent snail mail so they pile up on someone's desk (whoever handles Mrs May's and Sir Oliver Heald's post), ready for when Parliament returns from recess/conferences.

    DO NOT REPLY TO ANY PRIVATE MESSAGE HERE OFFERING TO 'HELP' IN ANY WAY.

    We help on threads but the regulars here will not pm you secretly, so delete any private message if you get one from a poster with less than 1000 posts.
    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the breadcrumb trail, top of page: Household & Travel > Motoring > Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking & READ THE 'NEWBIES' FAQS THREAD.
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Fixtrace6
    • By Fixtrace6 21st Sep 16, 9:25 AM
    • 40 Posts
    • 46 Thanks
    Fixtrace6
    Received the letter of claim but there are lots of things wrong with it so I have replied pointing out some of the mistakes (not all of them)
    I have worked out the system, it is a standard template letter followed by a slightly more personalised letter in a bigger envelope followed by the inaccurate template letter etc.
    Has anyone got anything after the LOC yet?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 21st Sep 16, 2:14 PM
    • 41,803 Posts
    • 53,953 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Yes, BW legal are issuing claims, loads on pepipoo. I think even at least one re an Airport.
    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the breadcrumb trail, top of page: Household & Travel > Motoring > Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking & READ THE 'NEWBIES' FAQS THREAD.
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • pappa golf
    • By pappa golf 21st Sep 16, 2:39 PM
    • 6,444 Posts
    • 6,238 Thanks
    pappa golf
    a 40ft container full of popcorn machines will arrive in the UK next week


    bring it on JLA ,
    Last edited by pappa golf; 21-09-2016 at 6:08 PM.
    Have YOU had to walk 500 miles?
    Were you advised to walk 500 more?
    You could be entitled to compensation.
    Call the Pro Claimers NOW.
    • mowkid
    • By mowkid 21st Sep 16, 7:41 PM
    • 64 Posts
    • 107 Thanks
    mowkid
    Received the letter of claim but there are lots of things wrong with it so I have replied pointing out some of the mistakes (not all of them)
    I have worked out the system, it is a standard template letter followed by a slightly more personalised letter in a bigger envelope followed by the inaccurate template letter etc.
    Has anyone got anything after the LOC yet?
    Originally posted by Fixtrace6
    I have a thread going because I am trying to help my wife's carer lady. We have recieved a Letter of Claim and I posted on my thread. Is yours exactly the same. I've emailed it to the SRA as a bit more fuel to the complaint we raised.
    • Fixtrace6
    • By Fixtrace6 6th Oct 16, 4:53 PM
    • 40 Posts
    • 46 Thanks
    Fixtrace6
    Another BWL letter. The one on nice paper. No mention of Elliot or Beavis or answering my question about was it a LBC. They say they have requested evidence of the contravention from vcs which will be forwarded when they get it. BUT they then say I have to contact them within a very short space of time to pay the balance or it MAY result in a claim.
    It seems more like a going through the motions letter.
    I will reply again (and forward it to csa) pointing out that if they send boilerplate letters followed by cut and stick letters they will make mistakes. And I will do it nice and politely as I am writing as if it will be read by a judge.
    • Fixtrace6
    • By Fixtrace6 14th Oct 16, 8:12 PM
    • 40 Posts
    • 46 Thanks
    Fixtrace6
    Still playing ping pong. Have had another letter sort of threatening to take me to court.

    Read this on The Financial Services Register
    https://register.fca.org.uk/ShPo_HomePage

    Exempt professional firm This type of firm (such as solicitors, accountants and chartered surveyors) can provide some regulated products and services as part of their normal professional services, without being authorised or an agent of an authorised firm.
    • The Financial Ombudsman Service will not be able to settle a dispute with this firm.
    • It cannot be determined if FSCS cover would apply to this firm. Please contact the firm directly to understand whether their products/services would be covered by FSCS.

    Was just interested in the phrase "FOS will not be able to settle a dispute with this firm"

    Does that mean anything to people complaining about bwl?

    I must admit I find this whole legal thing fascinating. The law tries to be yes/no but it is so grey at times.I suppose until someone proves grey is black or white. Right?

    Anyway I think my complaint to SRA was quite light, not too many details. I do have a life. I have since detailed all their faults ready to send off. But I have also complained to bwl complaints dept. We will see what they come back with. Then will send a more detailed letter to SRA. I am all for dragging this out.
    • Fixtrace6
    • By Fixtrace6 27th Oct 16, 4:05 PM
    • 40 Posts
    • 46 Thanks
    Fixtrace6
    Have had reply from bwl acknowledging complaint.

    But to anyone else out there who has a pcn from VCS at LJLA, the signs have been changed since they were erected in July 2012. The signs now say "may be" in the sentence "Vehicle keeper details may be requested from the DVLA". If you look at the photo on Parking Prankster you can see they changed the wording sometime. Does anyone know when?

    Anyway here is more information from a person doing far more than me and needs re-telling. This is one of the reasons VCS will never take a LJLA approach road pcn to court (assuming you have replied to them denying the debt).

    "For the record and in case it's of any benefit should one of these 'stopping' matters ever come to court this is the latest statement from Liverpool Council in response to my ongoing complaint about the illegality of the signs.

    October 19th 2016
    QUOTE from Liverpool Council
    "Having had a conversation with the airport yesterday, they have now secured funding to progress the design and have advised me that their consultants will be progressing this on 7 November with a view to submitting the application forthwith.

    I can assure you that we are just as frustrated as yourself in the time it is taking to submit the application, but hopefully there is now some light at the end of the tunnel in terms of getting an application submitted."


    Earlier this year Liverpool Council (who were not prepared to grant advertising consent for the application then in place - 15A/0657), suggested that LJLA employ design consultants to redesign the signs.
    It beggars belief that having confirmed in writing that the current signs are illegal (and by implication will need to be removed), the council still drag their heels and refuse to ask LJLA to remove them until such time as new signs are granted Advertising Consent. It's also seems unlikely that a big organisation like Peel Ports (LJLA) couldn't find funding for sign redesigns earlier.

    Chronology
    2012, July - Signs erected by LJLA without consent
    2015, July - First application for advertising consent
    2015, September - Liverpool Council's first indication that discussions with LJLA about the signs are taking place
    2016, January - Liverpool Council indicate that the signs have been submitted to the Dept. of Transport to check that they meet the relevant standards.
    2016, April - Liverpool Council say "revised signage proposals may come forward as a result of initial feedback that has been given to the applicant"
    2016, April 4th - Liverpool Council say "the airport have presented a revised design for the signs which has been checked the Highways department, however there were still some flaws in the design. Highways have now recommended that the Airport employ the services of a specialist consultant to do the redesign. The scheme is back in the airport’s hands at the moment.
    2016, May 18th. LJLA withdraw the Advertising Consent application. My guess is that the Council had intimated that they were under pressure to determine the application and would have to reject it.


    ... and ironically after posting earlier I have just received a much more positive response from the Planning Enforcement Dept at the Council.

    QUOTE from Liverpool Council
    , Given the length of time this matter has been continuing, I agree that if by 7th November 2016, no application has been submitted (indicating that action is proposed shortly), it would be appropriate for me to write to the Airport requesting the removal of the signs.


    Let's see what Nov. 7th brings."

    It might be worth while for people contesting pcn's at LJLA to write to Liverpool City Council questioning the signage.
    • Fixtrace6
    • By Fixtrace6 11th Dec 16, 11:33 PM
    • 40 Posts
    • 46 Thanks
    Fixtrace6
    Another letter from bwl to say not upholding the complaint.
    There is lots of info in there which I haven't had time to digest yet.
    They have said it's breach of contract. My first thought is to reply asking for a copy of the terms and conditions of the contract and what timescale was allowed for the driver to consider them and decide whether or not to accept them.
    They are still referring to Elliot v Loake. Wasn't this dismissed by a judge in a small claims court recently? Or is that wishful thinking on my part?
    And they have said the LoC is not a pre-action letter (even though the LoC says I am placed on notice that they will commence legal proceedings without further notice).
    I will let you know more when I have studied it a bit more (been out on a christmas do so need a clearer head to read it properly)
    • esmerobbo
    • By esmerobbo 12th Dec 16, 4:16 AM
    • 4,638 Posts
    • 6,109 Thanks
    esmerobbo
    The illegal signs were changed in April 2015. When further signs were also added.

    http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/vehicle-control-systems-signage-at.html
    • Herzlos
    • By Herzlos 12th Dec 16, 9:24 AM
    • 4,409 Posts
    • 3,840 Thanks
    Herzlos
    Did you complain to the SRA too? How did that get on.

    At this stage, I'd be tempted to call their bluff:

    "Since we're at a fundamental disagreement as to the law, I suggest you bring this to a court where a judge will correct you, again."
    • Fixtrace6
    • By Fixtrace6 14th Dec 16, 4:48 PM
    • 40 Posts
    • 46 Thanks
    Fixtrace6
    Yes I did complain but I accidentally sent it to the LO. They acknowledged and sent a case number but a few weeks later replied to say I should complain to bw internal complaints first and the SRA. But I have been very busy that I haven't forwarded it to the SRA yet - but I will. I just want to add the most recent stuff.
    I am drafting a reply to bw's response to my complaint. Their reply is just so full of rubbish. I have given you the bones earlier. They don't know when the IAS came into effect or when pofa was implemented. They still insist Elliott v Loake is relevant. They never acknowledge any reference to Henry G. There is no way they would dare bring this to court - unless they are idiots, but then again I've read some of their attempts at court. I find it really interesting that they are prepared to spend so much time and effort and energy on a lost cause. Maybe they realise they have to continue with the charade because if they admit to one person they are backing down it would be all over the internet. They have to pretend to everyone that they have a case. The amount of (wo)man hours they have spent responding to me is well over 150. I am trying to make sure they waste more time and effort. But in a perverse way I am enjoying it all. I note that some threads of pre-pofa have gone quiet. I hope they haven't caved in. It would be good if people just wrote a line to say where they are up to.
    Next installment to follow when I have heard back.
    • Fixtrace6
    • By Fixtrace6 15th Dec 16, 12:58 AM
    • 40 Posts
    • 46 Thanks
    Fixtrace6
    Just a quickie.
    Is GPEOL still ok to claim? I seem to remember some reference to a case about this where it was thrown out.
    • yotmon
    • By yotmon 15th Dec 16, 2:11 AM
    • 394 Posts
    • 531 Thanks
    yotmon
    Just a quickie.
    Is GPEOL still ok to claim? I seem to remember some reference to a case about this where it was thrown out.
    Originally posted by Fixtrace6
    As dead as a Dodo.
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 15th Dec 16, 6:20 AM
    • 11,430 Posts
    • 17,176 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    I seem to remember some reference to a case about this where it was thrown out.
    Understatement!

    Beavis v ParkingEye, the biggest case ever in the private parking sector. GPEOL all but killed off by the highest court in the land - The Supreme Court.
    NEWBIES - wise up - DO NOT IGNORE A PARKING CHARGE NOTICE - you have been warned!

    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.

    Please note: I am NOT involved in any 'paid for' appeals service.
    • Fixtrace6
    • By Fixtrace6 16th Dec 16, 5:39 PM
    • 40 Posts
    • 46 Thanks
    Fixtrace6
    I thought there might be another case after Beavis because didn't that say the 100 charge was ok because it was in large print. In the case of Liverpool Airport the charge was in little letters and not obvious.The new signs have the charge a bit more prominent. (And the signs are not legal and still not up to DoT standards.)
    I have read loads of posts but have difficulty keeping track because there are so many. I'm curious to know if there has been a gpeol win since Beavis or are people just not attempting it.
    • hoohoo
    • By hoohoo 16th Dec 16, 6:29 PM
    • 1,617 Posts
    • 2,947 Thanks
    hoohoo
    Just a quickie.
    Is GPEOL still ok to claim? I seem to remember some reference to a case about this where it was thrown out.
    Originally posted by Fixtrace6
    Yes, GPEOL is still valid in this case. You will be claiming that the charge is a penalty and unfair consumer term.

    In Beavis it was not an unfair consumer term because the motorist had a fair chance to read and understand the term, and it was a fair bargain that the motorist got the valuable consideration of 2 hours free parking for the risk of a 85 charge if they overstayed.

    In this case, there is no bargain as parking is not allowed at all, and the motorist does not have a chance to read the terms while driving.

    Additionally this is not a breach of contract but a trespass, and therefore only actual costs can be charged, not a random amount.
    Dedicated to driving up standards in parking
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

351Posts Today

3,208Users online

Martin's Twitter