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
    • si_dean
    • By si_dean 18th Oct 17, 10:13 PM
    • 20Posts
    • 6Thanks
    si_dean
    Bw legal letter ..... LJLA
    • #1
    • 18th Oct 17, 10:13 PM
    Bw legal letter ..... LJLA 18th Oct 17 at 10:13 PM
    Hi guys,

    I've editted this post a little from my original one,
    As i didnt mention that this case was as a result of stopping (bery briefly)
    At Liverpool JOhn Lennon Airport!

    To set the scene.....
    Car was stopped (for about 10 secs) in my car at Liverpool airport back in April of this year to pick g.f up. 3 letters from VCS (vehicle control services) were sent out (but to my previous 'parents house address" as i have moved house. After ignoring the 3 x letters in question from the VCS, they say its now been passed to BW Legal, and its been sent to my current address this time!

    Now we are up to date, this is the stage we are at now.

    As i ignored the 3 previous letters i thought that would be the lot, but now they have gotten my actual address from somewere (i don't know were and isn't this surely a breach of any consumer protection rules??).
    With this in mind, technically speaking as this letter from
    BW Legal is the first from them, i could argue this is the first corrispodancr ive had alltogether about the fine full stop? Would this work or would they twist this somehow?

    I was initially thinking of ignoring this first letter from BW LEGAL, but looking at lots of threads about this & other similar scenarios, the advice is to NOT IGNORE, but with those, the circumstances can differ!

    To summarise, The info on the BW Legal letter states the date on contravention is 02-04-17 and the balance is £100 pcn plus vehicle control services of £60 = total current balance of £160!

    With the above info in mind, as this is the first lot of literature come to my current address, were do i stand with this.

    To confirm, this is my first BW Legal letter "threatening"..... not saying its going to happen, but "threatining" me saying i "may" be liable for court fee's , further solicitors fees and CCJ's bla bla bla! The attached letter accompanying the BW legal letter is one from VCS, just confirming that as I have not made any arrangements to pay the previous amount(s) from them, this has been passed to BE LEGAL ..... and suprise suprise, my address now stated in the corner of their letter is my updated address were i love currently..... probably because BW Legal have now told threm of this.....
    Or it wouldnt suprise me if BW Legal have printed both letters off themselves and just dpcked the accompanying letter yo show VCS's watermark and updated my current address in there?

    If i have a point to prove here (in ref to them sending previous corrispondance to my old parents house address) what do i need to do or say...... or what letter template should i use ..... or do i jist simply ignore as this was for simply stopping very briefly at liverpool airport to pick my g.f up??

    If i do ignore which has been suggested by another member on this forum (thanks again for all your help by the way!) will i get more letters and eventually they will fade ?
    I just want to be certain nothing in the form of a nasty CCJ would appear on my credit file etc?

    I have a feeling it wont but some reassurance from the pro's out there would be great
    Last edited by si_dean; 19-10-2017 at 3:12 PM.
Page 2
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 10th Dec 17, 12:08 AM
    • 5,095 Posts
    • 3,550 Thanks
    KeithP
    As Umkomaas said, does what they have sent match what they should've sent according to the PaP?

    For example, from the first page of their LBC that you have shown us, it appears that they have sent you an Information Sheet and a Reply Form, yet you have asked them for those items at 11.

    Do they specify a time limit for you to respond?
    Is that limit 30 days - as required by the new PaP?
    .
    • si_dean
    • By si_dean 10th Dec 17, 10:07 AM
    • 20 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    si_dean
    Ok, thanks Redx.

    Just a thought on the postage..... do you think its worth me actually sending it recored postage (i donít mind doing so) and ita more for peice of mind that the letter has arrived at its destination.
    For all I know they could receive my letter but pretend ďnothing was received at their endĒ.
    Again, this is all new to me so iím not sure if this could or has happened in the past thats all.
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 10th Dec 17, 10:10 AM
    • 33,972 Posts
    • 17,898 Thanks
    Quentin
    No. Follow the advice to get a cert of posting

    Do not use the signed for service!
    • pappa golf
    • By pappa golf 10th Dec 17, 10:22 AM
    • 8,000 Posts
    • 8,357 Thanks
    pappa golf
    Ok, thanks Redx.

    Just a thought on the postage..... do you think its worth me actually sending it recored postage (i donít mind doing so) and ita more for peice of mind that the letter has arrived at its destination.
    For all I know they could receive my letter but pretend ďnothing was received at their endĒ.
    Again, this is all new to me so iím not sure if this could or has happened in the past thats all.
    Originally posted by si_dean
    or , they could refuse to sign for letters , and you would then have proof that they did not receive it
    • Johnersh
    • By Johnersh 10th Dec 17, 11:52 AM
    • 770 Posts
    • 1,448 Thanks
    Johnersh
    For all I know they could receive my letter but pretend “nothing was received at their end”.
    They could. But the court rules presume post arrives 2 days after despatch (whether it did or didn't). In theory even a certificate of posting is overkill, but certainly does no harm.

    Whereas my firm sign for everything, I have seen at least one on this forum (and there may well be many others) where the letters were not signed for and returned.
    • si_dean
    • By si_dean 4th Jan 18, 7:44 PM
    • 20 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    si_dean
    Hi guys,

    Ok so i did my letter as outlined above and ive just had a 12 page letter back from them.

    If you would like me to upload copies of them i’ll be more than happy too.

    To summarise, they have attached photographic evidence this time round (which they failed to do previously) and it shows the car of which is registered to myself stopping briefly to pick a passenger up. The picture shows my car and reg but does not show the face of the driver. In response to me asking are they pursuing me as the registered keeper or as the actual driver, they’ve advised
    “for the avoidance of doubt, our client has not relied on upon the protection of freedoms act 2012, schedule 4 to impose liability on me as the registered keeper.

    In terms of their contract agreement with the land owner and a copy / evidence of said contract including the specifics of the signage, they just mention the signs are clearly displayed (which they are not!) and that the text size of the signs are relative to the average approach speed of an approaching vehicle on those roads..

    The photographic evidence does not show any signage anywere
    Around the vacinity of The car.

    Interestingly, with regards to the contract between their client and the land owner, they’ve said
    “Its our clients postion that it is the lawful occupier of the site & enforces and manages the site terms in a reasonable manner”.
    They then go on to advise “ This is clearly displayed on the signage located on site. The contract between their client and the land owner is a legally priviledged document which I have no rght to inspect.

    The pictures they have then also attached of the signage are just close ups of the so-called signs that are around there. A picture of one of these signs is even dated 30/08/2012 and all you can see in the background is an industrial unit so who’s to say that is even the same land as the incident took place??

    As ive mentioned above i’ll be more than happy to upload the pictures if you require these.
    Last edited by si_dean; 04-01-2018 at 10:16 PM.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 4th Jan 18, 11:05 PM
    • 52,728 Posts
    • 66,262 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I would reply, pointing out their omissions and the lack of evidence, sign dated 2012, etc., and robustly conclude that they have failed to show a cause of action for any claim in law.
    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.

    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 4th Jan 18, 11:20 PM
    • 16,284 Posts
    • 25,330 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    they just mention the signs are clearly displayed (which they are not!) and that the text size of the signs are relative to the average approach speed of an approaching vehicle on those roads..
    This might help:

    http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/vehicle-control-systems-signage-at.html
    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.
    • esmerobbo
    • By esmerobbo 5th Jan 18, 6:35 AM
    • 4,688 Posts
    • 6,163 Thanks
    esmerobbo
    The signs were updated last summer and you cant really miss them as they have erected a second set behind the first pair. You wont get anywhere regarding signage as there are numerous and you cant miss them, although you may not be looking for them.

    The font on the first signs was increased in size and the wording on the signs was reduced as per Liverpool's councils planning department requirements.

    There is also a 10 metre section of road at the beginning of the road set in blue road marking which is supposedly to let people know the road is private.

    http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/01/planning-permission-17a0037-signage-at.html

    http://northgate.liverpool.gov.uk/PlanningExplorer17/ApplicationSearch.aspx

    Application: 17A/0037
    • si_dean
    • By si_dean 5th Jan 18, 8:12 AM
    • 20 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    si_dean
    Hi guys,

    Thanks for all your responses.

    Coupon m: i cant help but feel i would need to write more back to them that just the date element of ine of their signage, so (and this applies to anybody else) who can answer this question, ive read the prking prankster and othwr threads about the physical road signage, but i’m unsure with what to reapond back fo them with now.
    My previous one was a letter containing a fair few paragraphs, so this time round do i just quote what you have said in your comment Coupon M with some bits taken from prking prankster.

    Some tips or a format to go back to them wth would be greatfully appreciated.

    Cheers.
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 5th Jan 18, 8:25 AM
    • 7,606 Posts
    • 6,678 Thanks
    The Deep
    for the avoidance of doubt, our client has not relied on upon the protection of freedoms act 2012, schedule 4 to impose liability on me as the registered keeper.

    Are they quoting Elliott v Loake? If so, read these

    http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/01/skipton-judge-rubbishes-elliot-v-loake.html


    http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/excel-v-ms-x-c8dp5c7t.html
    Last edited by The Deep; 05-01-2018 at 8:30 AM.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 5th Jan 18, 9:24 AM
    • 16,284 Posts
    • 25,330 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    The signs were updated last summer and you cant really miss them as they have erected a second set behind the first pair.
    @esmerobbo - do you mean summer 2017?

    Car was stopped (for about 10 secs) in my car at Liverpool airport back in April of this year
    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.
    • esmerobbo
    • By esmerobbo 5th Jan 18, 2:08 PM
    • 4,688 Posts
    • 6,163 Thanks
    esmerobbo
    @esmerobbo - do you mean summer 2017?
    Originally posted by Umkomaas
    It was a long drawn out process as it was retrospective planning permission. Everything was done in stages. The original confusing signs were changed early in the year around January but they then later added a further two about 25 metres along the road, in the spring I took some pictures in May and the signs were there then. The final things they did was place the two welcome boards up before the first signs and recover the road in the blue asphalt.

    So it was all finished in the early summer but the signs were changed around this time last year.

    However all the signs except the two repeaters where there originally and just replaced with the new signs.

    As much as I detest the set up at JLA I would say apart from not being able to read them without stopping and them being confusing it would be difficult to say you didn't see them as they are on every lamp post and about every 10 metres along the fences both side of the carriageway. If you alter the dates on streetview you can see the different signs.

    https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.3399243,-2.8582893,3a,75y,180h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAVhkuck3JpyC6jbhHlKEsQ!2e0!5s2 0160701T000000!7i13312!8i6656
    Last edited by esmerobbo; 05-01-2018 at 2:20 PM.
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 5th Jan 18, 6:00 PM
    • 1,483 Posts
    • 1,597 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    So after April 2017? So irrelevant to this ?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 5th Jan 18, 11:35 PM
    • 52,728 Posts
    • 66,262 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    this time round do i just quote what you have said in your comment Coupon M with some bits taken from prking prankster.
    Originally posted by si_dean
    Yes, that'll be fine. In your own writing style, but you can plagiarise what others have posted, of course.

    As an aside, please contact WHICH? magazine using the easy link from this thread to tell them briefly of your plight. The more people who contact WHICH, the more likely they are to take up this unregulated scam industry as their next cause:

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5765579
    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.

    • si_dean
    • By si_dean 8th Jan 18, 2:17 PM
    • 20 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    si_dean
    Hi Guys,


    Thanks again for your tips & help on the latest letter BW legal have sent me.


    From this (and looking at info from other threads like the parking prankster ones) here is my potential draft that I intend to send back to them.


    Please do let me know if you feel there's any bits I should add (or remove for that matter).


    Once again, all you guys are brilliant and your help is truly appreciated.


    Here is my 'potential draft i'm going to send back to them'.


    As I write this post i'm currently at work so I don't have any of the literature
    to hand, thus I don't know what the references and figures are so these shall be
    amended from the blanks once I get back home (along with any input from you
    guys).


    ===============================================
    Your Ref: xxxxxxxxx


    Dear Sirs,


    In reference to your latest letter (dated .. /.. / ..)


    Enclosed in your letter were xx pages of the signs which you say are displayed on the roads up to the airport.
    From the pictures you have enclosed showing the vehicle registered to myself in them, none of them at any point visibly show signs saying that stopping is not allowed. Furthermore, the pictures you have attached without the vehicle in them, do not indicate that they were taken around the Liverpool John Lennon airport Land. One of these said pictures is in fact is dated 30/08/2012 which is well before this incident took place, and in that picture, all you can see in the background is an industrial unit with no mention or visibility of the airport land.


    My findings of the pictures you have attached of the signs saying that no stopping is allowed, conclude that
    * The signs contains ten times the number of words which can be read safely
    * The smallest font hiding the charge can never be read safely
    * The biggest font is only 1/2 of the required size for vehicles travelling at the speed the
    * The small font hiding the charge is about 1/5 of the required size
    * The biggest font is only readable once the vehicle is too close for the driver to safely turn their head.
    * The biggest font is only readable for 1 second by a driver with legal eyesight travelling at the speed limit.

    The eyesight standards for driving require a driver to read a 8cm number plate at a distance of 20m. This translates into being able to read 4cm letters at 10m.
    The roads leading upto the airport have a 40mph speed limit. At 40mph a vehicle travels 18 meters a second. The font becomes readable at 20m away, and the sign is passed around one second later. Two seconds are needed for 'settle time' before any words can be read. The small print is therefore not readable, as by the time a driver's eyes have settled, the sign has been passed.


    There also remains the impossible conundrum that to drive safely, the driver must stop reading the sign at a distance of 19.38m, but can only read the signs once they get 10m away. Thus, the signs are never safely readable.


    There is no possibility these signs can ever be said to form a contract with the driver, and the signs actually tempt drivers into unsafe driving practices, by making them turn their head too far from the road, and keeping their attention off the road for too long.


    With all this in mind, plus there is still no proof of any contract you have with the land owners, I robustly conclude that you've failed to show a cause of action for any claim in law.


    ===============================================
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 8th Jan 18, 4:23 PM
    • 1,483 Posts
    • 1,597 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    This concludes the matter and I expect to hear no further from you or any agent of yours

    If you do not agree, then provide a fully compliant LBA within 14 days. Any other curse of action will be prime facie harassment, as it will be clear you have no intention of proving your assertions.
    • si_dean
    • By si_dean 8th Jan 18, 6:26 PM
    • 20 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    si_dean
    @ nosferatu1001 ...... going off your last post, do I still need to put in the bit about “fully complient LBA within 14 days) as I have a feeling they’ve alreay sent that to me you see ?

    Just to confirm (in terms of letters i’ve received so far from
    BW Legal
    ,
    I’ve had:

    1) Letter dated 09th october 2017 (no title or statement opening ..... just says “Dear Sir”
    2) Letter dated 07th November 2017 (titled FINAL NOTICE)
    3 Letter dated 06th December 2017 (titled LETTER OF CLAIM)
    4) The most recent one in response to my letter I sent them asking for evidemce etc ......
    which they have attached pictures of (no title or statsment opening just Dear <and then my name>
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 8th Jan 18, 8:29 PM
    • 1,483 Posts
    • 1,597 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    I bet it wasnít fully compliant. BW hasnít managed one yet.
    • si_dean
    • By si_dean 8th Jan 18, 10:01 PM
    • 20 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    si_dean
    from what i’ve learned so far about this BW LEGAL firm they like to use a lot words containing
    “law and contract”

    it all seems very fictional-though as there is nothing to back it up.
    They will try and say this that & the other but fundementally its all nonsense!!

    Do you think its worth while me putting the bit in about the “fully compliant LBA” bit then?

    Once again, your help is greatfully appreciated :0)
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

3,835Posts Today

9,435Users online

Martin's Twitter