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
    • robinbetts
    • By robinbetts 1st May 17, 8:26 PM
    • 13Posts
    • 3Thanks
    robinbetts
    Ticket after fault with parking app - advice please
    • #1
    • 1st May 17, 8:26 PM
    Ticket after fault with parking app - advice please 1st May 17 at 8:26 PM
    Hello,

    Earlier this year I received a PCN in a private NCP car park at a train station. I've gone through the appeals process with NCP and with POPLA and had them rejected, and now had letters from ZZPS and Wright Hassall LLP. I'd like some advice on whether I have any grounds for not paying, and what I should do next.

    I'll try and explain the situation... I parked at about 7am before catching a train. I'd used this car park before and used their cashless service from Dash Parking which allows you to pay with an app or by text. On this occasion, I sent the text and got a cryptic response back suggesting that it had failed. I tried the app but it wouldn't accept my password, even after following the recovery process and receiving the same password back via text that I had been using!

    An aside - my password sent in plain text - I should be perusing them for breach of the PCI Compliance password requirements, given then hold my credit card details! Should I??

    After all this I had to catch the train so I took photo of the parking board so I could sort I think out later. After my train journey I was able to access a PC at about 12pm and tried logging in through there rather that the app. After following the website password recovery I managed to get in (website sent a new password), and made payment for the day (24h). On return to the car that evening there was a ticket, issued at about 9:30am.

    My feeling is that because I made reasonable effort to pay but was prevented due to a fault with the app, and that I subsequently payed, more than covering the time my car was parked, I would be justified in contesting the ticket. I have evidence of all the text, app and website interaction. But the appeals just state that because the t&cs printed at the car park state that you must pay before leaving your car, that I was in clear breach and therefore must pay the charge.

    If I was taken to court, would I have a leg to stand on with my argument?

    Also, how worried should I be about the Wright Hassall letter? It says...

    "Failure to make payment in full or contact us to discuss repayment of this debt may result in us recommending to our client that w pass this matter over to our Litigation Department. This may mean they will look to obtain a County Court Judgement."

    Lots of MAYs in that wording. I also read somewhere that it might be a good idea to make some kind of offer to them to settle??

    Many thanks for reading.
Page 1
    • Redx
    • By Redx 1st May 17, 8:34 PM
    • 14,789 Posts
    • 18,599 Thanks
    Redx
    • #2
    • 1st May 17, 8:34 PM
    • #2
    • 1st May 17, 8:34 PM
    if this is a train station its subject to bylaws and the TOC has 6 months to take you to magistrates court

    the letters are bluffing as regards what applies in this case and its unlikely that a PPC will take you to the small claims court , which is a 6 year window in england and wales

    this topic has been done to death on here so just read any threads about railways like INDIGO claims etc to see all the advice

    ignore anything apart from a proper LBC and if you do receive an MCOL from Northampton within the 6 year window come back to this thread and ask for further help

    I know its complicated, hence why I am asking you to read up on the real truths in these matters

    no TOC has taken anyone to the magistrates court AFAIK, and if its over 6 months then that issue has timed out

    this will just be debt collector letters with bluff and bluster , hence all the words like MAY

    none that we know of have gone to MCOL stage , including ones from ports and airports as well as train stations

    nobody can tell you your "chances" because none of these has been to court , it is thought that they wont want to test these issues in the small claims court
    Last edited by Redx; 01-05-2017 at 8:38 PM.
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
    • Autolycus2000
    • By Autolycus2000 1st May 17, 9:25 PM
    • 66 Posts
    • 69 Thanks
    Autolycus2000
    • #3
    • 1st May 17, 9:25 PM
    • #3
    • 1st May 17, 9:25 PM
    Have a read of this thread. Very similar situation to yours except that this one got cancelled on the initial appeal. That aside, the advice re byelaws and the very low risk of any court action will still be useful to you:

    http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=107743&pid=1221783
    • robinbetts
    • By robinbetts 1st May 17, 11:18 PM
    • 13 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    robinbetts
    • #4
    • 1st May 17, 11:18 PM
    • #4
    • 1st May 17, 11:18 PM
    Thanks for the replies, and link to that thread. I've been reading a lot of threads about this but hadn't seen anything like a similar situation. Also, I wasn't aware about the byelaw stuff. Pity I didn't come on here for some tips before I sent the appeals in.

    Will be start of July before the 6 months is up, but it sounds like that shouldn't be a concern anyway.

    I'll have to look through more of the threads, searching for railway specifically.

    Thanks
    • robinbetts
    • By robinbetts 10th May 17, 11:14 PM
    • 13 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    robinbetts
    • #5
    • 10th May 17, 11:14 PM
    Received a FORMAL LETTER OF CLAIM
    • #5
    • 10th May 17, 11:14 PM
    I've now received a letter from Wright Hassall titled FORMAL LETTER OF CLAIM. I'm taking this to be LBC and that I should respond as per the advice in the NEWBIES thread.

    I've been reading a lot of threads, trying to get an idea of what I should include in my response, but it's so overwhelming with so many different tracks to take. Can anyone advice as to which points I should use, so I can try and draft a letter?

    I know that the car park is under the Bylaws, but as I'm the driver, not the registered keeper, I don't think that can help me (from what I've read).

    I've been back to the car park to take photos of the signage, and bit that says payment must be made before leaving your car is hidden in the really really small print which is impossible to read unless you're a few inches away. Also, this is only on the sign by the Pay and Display machine, and not on the signs about the Dash App payment.

    I have photos of the letter, and of the signs, but I can't include the links here as I'm a new user.

    Here's what I thought might be relevant to respond with:

    1. State that they haven't complied with the Pre-Action Protocol, by not providing evidence.

    2. Request that they send all supporting evidence within 14 days.

    3. Try and make a case to them that the signage is inadequate to support the claim that I should have made payment before leaving the car in the car, as it's not visible to a driver, and not at all present on the signs offering the payment method that I used.

    A lot of the templates that I've seen on other threads make references to previous cases, but I'm lost as to if/how I should use these.

    Any pointers would be very much appreciated! I think I have until 16th to get my response back.

    Thanks
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 11th May 17, 4:59 AM
    • 13,625 Posts
    • 21,366 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    • #6
    • 11th May 17, 4:59 AM
    • #6
    • 11th May 17, 4:59 AM
    Just send a general rebuttal that you deny any liability to their client. Pick out any of the PD not covered in the LBC. Request all supporting evidence. I wouldn't go into any great detail about signage - keep all of that for your defence and Witness Statement in due course.

    But this is NCP - they have no record of any small claims court case since they were obliterated by James Mayhook (Google NCP v Mayhook) and which cost them a 6-figure sum. Is the WH letter signed by Tim Hawker?
    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.
    • robinbetts
    • By robinbetts 11th May 17, 6:38 AM
    • 13 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    robinbetts
    • #7
    • 11th May 17, 6:38 AM
    • #7
    • 11th May 17, 6:38 AM
    Thank you for the advice, I'll put something together today and post it here first if that's okay.

    Yes, the letter is signed by Tim Hawker. What is the significance of that?

    Thanks again!
    • Fruitcake
    • By Fruitcake 11th May 17, 9:27 AM
    • 39,748 Posts
    • 79,549 Thanks
    Fruitcake
    • #8
    • 11th May 17, 9:27 AM
    • #8
    • 11th May 17, 9:27 AM
    Thank you for the advice, I'll put something together today and post it here first if that's okay.

    Yes, the letter is signed by Tim Hawker. What is the significance of that?

    Thanks again!
    Originally posted by robinbetts
    I believe Tim Hawker works for a debt collector that buys letterheads from a solicitor. In other words, I think you have a debt collector letter not a real LBC. Hopefully the more experienced regulars will be able to confirm this. One other clue is the wording, letter of claim, not, letter before claim.
    It's all a tactic to make it look like the scammers are going to court when in fact they have no intention to do so.
    I married my cousin. I had to...
    I don't have a sister.

    All my screwdrivers are cordless.
    "You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks
    • robinbetts
    • By robinbetts 11th May 17, 7:30 PM
    • 13 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    robinbetts
    • #9
    • 11th May 17, 7:30 PM
    • #9
    • 11th May 17, 7:30 PM
    He does sign off the letter as Tim Hawker - Head of Debt Recovery Operations.

    I thought the same initially, about it not being an official LBC, but then I saw the reverse of the page, which states:

    "This letter is a Letter Before Claim pursuant to the Practice Direction on Pre Action Conduct and Protocol..."
    • robinbetts
    • By robinbetts 11th May 17, 10:28 PM
    • 13 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    robinbetts
    Thank you everyone for your advice.

    I have put this draft together, and would really appreciate some feedback before I send it. Anything I should add, or take out?

    ----------------------------

    Dear Mr Hawker,

    Your ref: xxxxxxxxx

    Thank you for your letter dated 02/05/2017, received 08/05/2017.

    First, I deny that I own any debt to your client, ZZPS, and any court proceedings will be vigorously defended.

    Your letter falls short of the requirements in the CPR for a Letter Before Claim, by (a) not providing a clear explanation of how the amount claimed has been calculated, (b) not listing the essential documents on which you intend to rely, and (c) not offering any form of ADR to avoid unnecessary court action.
    Please send me a Letter Before Claim that complies with the requirements of Annex A Para 2 of the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct within 7 days of this letter, otherwise I shall consider the matter closed. Any response other than a compliant Letter Before Claim will result in a referral to the Solicitors Regulation Authority.

    This letter is a formal complaint which you should pass to your Compliance Officer.

    In accordance with the Pre-Action Protocols, please also provide the following within 7 days of this letter:
    - A copy of the original PCN.
    - All timestamped photographs of the car at the material location.
    - All timestamped photographs of the signage at the material location.
    - Any further supporting evidence that your client wishes to rely on.


    Yours sincerely,

    xxxxxxxxxx

    ----------------------
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 12th May 17, 6:20 AM
    • 13,625 Posts
    • 21,366 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    First, I deny that I own any debt to your client, ZZPS, and any court proceedings will be vigorously defended.
    There's the giveaway - ZZPS is just another debt collector, they cannot sue.

    '... own any debt'. That would read 'owe', not 'own'. But, you're not denying a debt, because no debt has been proven. You are denying any 'liability'.

    I wouldn't be Dear Mr Hawker-ing it, too personal in my view. A cold Dear Sir will be better.

    Send it off see how they respond.

    By the way, Hawker is part of the WH set up, but he's not a solicitor. It is quite possible that the letter has actually come from ZZPS, with WH pimping out their letterhead for a couple of quid a pop.
    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.
    • Loadsofchildren123
    • By Loadsofchildren123 12th May 17, 10:25 AM
    • 982 Posts
    • 1,694 Thanks
    Loadsofchildren123
    You are referring to the out of date Practice direction - Pre-Action Conduct.


    There is no longer an Annex A.


    here's the current one:


    https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/pd_pre-action_conduct
    • Loadsofchildren123
    • By Loadsofchildren123 12th May 17, 10:39 AM
    • 982 Posts
    • 1,694 Thanks
    Loadsofchildren123
    Please send me a Letter Before Claim that complies with the requirements of ex A Para 2 of paragraphs 3, 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct within 7 days of this letter, otherwise
    you are denying me the opportunity to understand the claim and my position in relation to it (paragraph 3 of the Practice Direction) and to reply properly to your letter (as I am obliged to do by paragraphs 6(b) and (c)). You are also denying the parties any chance to attempt a settlement or even to "take stock" of their own positions (paragraphs 8/9 and 12 of the Practice Direction). I am sure I do not have to remind you that there are consequences for failing to comply with the requirements of the Practice Direction (paragraphs 13-16) and refer you to the cases of Charles Church Developments Ltd v Stent Foundations Limited & Peter Dann Limited [2007] EWHC 855), Webb Resolutions Ltd v Waller Needham & Green [2012] EWHC 3529 (Ch) and Daejan Investments Limited v The Park West Club Limited (Part 20) – Buxton Associates [2003] EWHC 2872

    Unless I receive a full response to this letter within 7 days I shall consider the matter closed. Any response other than a compliant Letter Before Claim will result in a referral to the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Should your client choose to issue and pursue proceedings in the absence of any meaningful compliance with the Practice Direction, I will invite the court to impose sanctions and full costs will be sought pursuant to Rule 27.14(2)(g)

    You want to add to your list of documents the contract NCP has with the landowner granting it rights to operate on the site.
    • robinbetts
    • By robinbetts 12th May 17, 4:01 PM
    • 13 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    robinbetts
    Thank you Umkomaas and Loadsofchildren123 for helping with that letter. I've taken those changes and sent it off today. Let's see what happens next. I'm so grateful for the help that everyone gives on here, it's such a support. I was getting a bit confused last night when trying to pick through the Justice website and many threads trying to figure out what was relevant and up-to-date and what wasn't.
    Thanks again!
    • Rushie83
    • By Rushie83 17th Jun 17, 10:54 AM
    • 5 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    Rushie83
    @robinbetts please could I have a copy of the final letter?
    I'm in a similar position.

    Thanks.
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

5,119Posts Today

9,188Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Byebye! I'm about to stop work & twitter, to instead spend glorious time with Mrs & mini MSE. Wishing u a lovely summer. See u in 10 days.

  • WARNING Did you start Uni in or after 2012? The interest's rising to 6.1%; yet it doesnt work like you think. See https://t.co/IQ8f0Vyetu RT

  • RT @JanaBeee: @MartinSLewis Boris is the anomaly (coffee), the others are versions of normal (beer). Lots of same candidates = vote share d?

  • Follow Martin