Urgent help - clamped in Southall (Iceland Car Park)

makara

Coblcris wrote: »

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=offer+to+treat

Ah - something new learnt - thanks a ton!

sarahg1969

That should be invitation to treat.

makara

Hi, Guys.

I was advised to name my Bank as a "co-Defendant" in this clamping case for not preventing my money to be paid to the Clampers - here it is in full - any suggestions welcomed.

Many thanks.

========

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=52832&st=120&gopid=490434&#entry490434

NOTICE BEFORE ACTION AGAINST BARCLAYS BANK PLC


To -

COMPLAINTS SECTION
Barclays Bank Debit Card Operations
Barclays
SWIFT HOUSE
WESTWOOD BUSINESS PARK
COTTONTREE
CV4 8JG



Date - 28th July 2010


Dear Sirs,


PLEASE NOTE THAT I WANT THIS LETTER OF COMPLAINT TO BE ACKNOWLEDGED (IN WRITING TO MY HOME ADDRESS) AS "RECEIVED" BY YOURSELVES - AND IF IT IS ESCALATED TO ANOTHER DEPARTMENT OR HIGHER DEPARTMENT WITHIN BARCLAYS, I WANT TO BE NOTIFIED OF THAT HIGHER DEPARTMENT'S ADDRESS AND ALSO OF THE NAMES OF THE INDIVIDUAL/S WHO WILL BE DEALING WITH THIS LETTER OF COMPLAINT.


Overview of claim:


I was clamped by a Private Parking Company called "Park Direct Ltd" (referred to hereon as the "PPC") on the 10th of July 2010. Under duress (all details below), I paid £250 via my Barclays Visa Debit Card to have my vehicle released - and was given a "Receipt" for the "Release fee", after which they unclamped my vehicle.


I immediately sought legal advice over this matter, and was advised that the "Receipt" paperwork given to me was illegal - thereby rendering the Clamping illegal - and thereby rendering the "Release fee" taken from me also illegal, and was directed to demand a "Visa Debit Chargeback" of my Bank, i.e. yourselves - to prevent the money being taken from my Account by the PPC's bank.


In light of this, on the 11th of July 2010 and 12th of July 2010, I made many phone calls to your Telephone Banking and Debit Card departments to demand a "Visa Debit Chargeback" - but was not given any help to effect this (full details lower down).


Consequently, the PPC's bank claimed the money from my Barclays current account on the 13th of July 2010.


This amounts to wilful negligence on your part.


I am hereby notifying yourselves of my intention to pursue an action towards obtaining a full refund from you for the wholly illegal "Towing Release fee" you allowed to be paid out of my current Account to the other party of £250, as you refused my demands for the "Visa Debit Chargeback" to be effected.


I will be writing a formal letter of complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service to formally investigate your Company in this matter - unless the full £250 is returned to me within 7 days of receipt of this letter, which I am sending by Recorded Delivery to you.



Full details of case:


********


1) After being clamped on the 10th of July 2010 and taking legal advice about the illegality of that action, I phoned your "Telephone Banking" and "Debit Card Operations" departments on both the 11th and 12th of July 2010 to demand a "Visa Debit Chargeback" be effected to prevent the £250 from leaving my current Account.


Virtually none of the Call Centre staff I spoke to had even heard of the "Visa Debit Chargeback" facility. This reflects poor training given to and insufficient knowledge of your staff.


********


2) On the 11th of July 2010, a female member of staff in "Debit Card Operations" I phoned went to discuss my demands with her Manager, then came back to tell me "As you gave the PPC your Debit card details, you need to take it up with them - Barclays can't get involved unless we receive a Fax from the PPC saying they want the transaction cancelled".


From the above, I was erroneously advised by your staff that I had to file a dispute with the other party. An illegal transaction such as the one in this case amounts to FRAUD or MISREPRESENTATION by the other party. But my case was not handled as such by your staff. Instead I was told to contact the other party myself to ask them to fax Barclays to advise they didn't want my money!


I demanded to speak to the Manager (who apparently was the only Manager around that day), but the female staff member said "She will tell you the same thing I just did" - then I requested another Manager phone me tomorrow - but I was told "Another Manager MAY call you tomorrow, since it's something Barclays can't get involved in".


This shows a total lack of support for me as your Customer. Additionally, no phone call came from any Manager on the next day, i.e. the 12th of July 2010.


********


3) On the 12th of July 2010 after waiting for a Manager from Barclays to call me (which did not happen), I phoned your staff in Debit Card Operations myself (one being a staff member, and another being a Manager called Christina) - they incorrectly told me that "There is nothing we can do as you have found it to be an illegal matter
- therefore it is up to you to appeal to the Clamping company".


Despite stating I entered my "Chip and Pin" number under DURESS to get my car released, your staff also told me "We can't help you recover your money after the PPC's bank takes your money - because you entered your Pin number".


But there is NO mention of this (i.e. entering my Pin number ruling out my RIGHT to my getting the "Visa Debit Chargeback" effected) in the terms for that Chargeback facility - which ALL UK Banks (including your own) who use Visa Debit cards are obliged to honour.


I am pasting for your convenience THREE internet links you need to read, regarding the details of this Chargeback rule in reference to the immediately preceding sentence by myself -


A) http://www.theukcardsassociation.org.uk/fi...ction_75_v3.pdf


http://www.which.co.uk/advice/your-rights-...cards/index.jsp


C) http://whatconsumer.co.uk/visa-debit-chargeback/


********


4) The money was taken from my account on the 13th of July 2010. I made several more phone calls to Barclays, but was not given an adequate response as to why my money had been released against my wishes to not do so.


On the 15th of July 2010 at 2:30 a.m., I spoke to a staff member called Michaela (in Debit Card Fraud and Debit Card Operations).


I told her of my above situation and complaints, and she said she would pass my complaint to "Complaints Handling" - I also asked her to ensure someone at Barclays would send me a reply in writing.


She promised me a Senior Manager would definitely call me back after Telephone Banking opened that same day, i.e. after 7 a.m. I was given a Reference (# 100D7B2C).


However, NO phone call came to me from Barclays that day. This is a totally unacceptable lack of commitment based on a promise your Company gave me, and then did not fulfil.


********


5) On the 16th of July 2010, I phoned your Complaints section and spoke to a Customer Relations Manager (Chinwe James) at 6:30 p.m. She told me an initial letter acknowledging the placing of my complaint had just been sent out to my Home address. I demanded in the meantime she send me a Copy of the actual terms and conditions of my Barclays Visa Debit card, and that she highlight the part stating "If your PIN was entered, then you do not qualify for a chargeback".


But despite my repeated requests for her to highlight the EXACT passage in the Terms and Conditions where this may be stated, she kept telling me to read it myself
- and was told to "Go into any branch of Barclays if you still don't understand it".


This is a wholly inadequate response from your "Customer Relations" department, and shows a distinct lack of support for your Customers.


********


Additional information pertaining to this claim - I have attached a copy of the PPC's "Vehicle release fee Receipt". It is illegal due to these points -


********


Point 1) Neither of the two Licensees (in this case the Licensees being the Clampers) SIGNED the Receipt I was given upon paying the Fee. The PSIA Act (Private Security Industry Act (2001)) specifically states that Licensees providing a Receipt for "Release fees" for immobilised vehicles must provide their Names *AND* Signatures on said Receipt.


Also, the Clampers wrote the "location" part of the receipt as "Quality Foods", which is not detailed enough a location to be meaningful. No actual address of the
location was written on the Receipt at all. The same below PSIA Act specifies a location must be given. "Quality Foods" on its own does not constitute any meaningful location.


The specific Act is pasted below for your benefit. I have also included the relevant internet link it is taken from.

Please note that my additional points continue under that Act.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2007/uksi_20070810_en_1


Statutory Instruments
2007 No. 810
SECURITY INDUSTRY
The Private Security Industry Act 2001 (Licences) Regulations 2007



Made 13th March 2007
Laid before Parliament 16th March 2007
Coming into force 6th April 2007

The Secretary of State makes the following Regulations in exercise of the powers conferred by sections 8, 9 and 24(1) and (5) of the Private Security Industry Act 2001(1), having regard to the definition of “prescribed” in section 24(1) of that Act.

In accordance with section 24(4)(2) of that Act he has consulted with the Scottish Ministers and the Security Industry Authority.

6.—(1) The granting of a licence to a person to engage in front line licensable conduct which involves the carrying out of any activities specified in regulation 4(4)(b) or © (immobilisation, restriction and removal of vehicles) shall be subject to the conditions specified in paragraph (2).

(2) The conditions specified for the purposes of this paragraph are—

(a) the licensee shall not immobilise, remove or restrict a vehicle in accordance with paragraph 3 or 3A of Schedule 2 to the 2001 Act if the vehicle is an invalid carriage or if a valid disability badge is displayed on the vehicle or if the vehicle is an emergency vehicle which is in use; and

(b) the licensee shall, on collecting any charge for the release of a vehicle that has been immobilised, removed or restricted in accordance with paragraph 3 or 3A of Schedule 2 to the 2001 Act, provide a receipt which contains the information specified in paragraph (3).

(3) The information specified for the purposes of this paragraph is—

(a) the *location* where the vehicle was immobilised, removed or restricted;

© the name *and signature* of the licensee;


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


********


Point 2) The Clampers have filled in the £250 release fee on the Receipt as being for "Tow or Cancellation" - this was unlawful, since no Tow truck was called out (nor called out and then cancelled) specifically for my vehicle.


********


Point 3) The fee of £250 was entirely unrepresentative of any "work" carried out by the Clamping company, and was clearly a Penalty. Civil Law states private companies or individuals cannot exact a Penalty on another individual. It is illegal to form a contract which a person supposedly entered into by parking on someone's land, and thereby also illegal to penalise them. In Civil Law they cannot penalise a person - they can only invoice them for costs which must be justifiable. There was absolutely no justification for a £250 cost for two men working for only one minute - with absolutely no travel to my vehicle.


********


Please note that there will be no further correspondence from myself to you following up this Notice Before Action letter. If the £250 debited from my Account is not returned to me in full within 7 days of Receipt of this letter (which is being sent by Recorded Delivery), I will be submitting this matter directly to the Financial Ombudsman Service to take action against Barclays Bank.

********


Yours Faithfully,

makara

Just had a response from Park Direct - see this link where you can see both pages as images at the bottom of the post -

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=52832&view=findpost&p=490599


Weirdly they are responding to my "appeal" - I didn't actually appeal, I sent a NBA!


Also they are stating no signature is needed, as just the Operators' names are fine.


Then they are chucking in that "Their tow truck was already on site" - convenienntly leaving out the part where I said it was NOT called for my vehicle.


Also they seem to be word-playing about the "Tax Disc" issue.


They have also more or less disregarded my complaint about the practically "invisible at night" signage.


Shall I keep hold of the letter (to use in Court), and still carry out Court Summons if the Land Owner doesn't pay me by the 9th of August? i.e. is this "Standard rubbish appeals response"?


Or has Park Direct's response killed any chance of my getting my money back?

Coupon-mad

That NBA to the Bank reads really well, makara.

As you know, I am currently putting together a Letter Before Action myself, against an Airline. I found this link useful, read Annex A to see what you should do to comply with pre-Action Protocols:

http://www.justice.gov.uk/civil/procrules_fin/contents/practice_directions/pd_pre-action_conduct.htm

Also, see Cityboy's post 596 on here, with IMHO some good paragraphs to include in a LBA:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2406507

Although the example LBA is to an Airline (ignore that bit!) I think it's useful because it includes reference to the CPR Pre-Action Protocols and asks the defendant to disclose to you in full any defence they intend to rely on, and warns of the the sanctions in terms of additional costs you may claim if they do not comply. All of which is mentioned in that first Pre-Action Conduct link.

HTH, I am reading it now as well so it's new to me too but looks useful IMHO.

Coupon-mad

makara wrote: »

Just had a response from Park Direct - see this link where you can see both pages as images at the bottom of the post -

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=52832&view=findpost&p=490599


Weirdly they are responding to my "appeal" - I didn't actually appeal, I sent a NBA!


Also they are stating no signature is needed, as just the Operators' names are fine.


Then they are chucking in that "Their tow truck was already on site" - convenienntly leaving out the part where I said it was NOT called for my vehicle.


Also they seem to be word-playing about the "Tax Disc" issue.


They have also more or less disregarded my complaint about the practically "invisible at night" signage.


Shall I keep hold of the letter (to use in Court), and still carry out Court Summons if the Land Owner doesn't pay me by the 9th of August? i.e. is this "Standard rubbish appeals response"?


Or has Park Direct's response killed any chance of my getting my money back?

IMHO you've got it in one (in bold).

Maybe you could just reply in a way that establishes for the benefit of the County Court Judge that you have complied with pre-Action Protocols and asking them to disclose the defence on which they will rely, and advise them which documents you intend to rely on (receipt, photos of signage, PSIA etc).

makara

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Although the example LBA is to an Airpline (ignore that bit!) I think it's useful because it includes reference to the CPR Pre-Action Protocols and asks the defendant to disclose to you in full any defence they intend to rely on, and the sanctions in terms of additional costs you may claim if they do not comply.

HTH, I am reading it now as well so it's new to me too but looks useful IMHO.

Very interesting! Many thanks - and thanks for feedback on my Bank letter too.

X Makara

makara

Coupon-mad wrote: »

IMHO you've got it in one (in bold).

Maybe you could just reply in a way that establishes for the benefit of the County Court Judge that you have complied with pre-Action Protocols and asking them to disclose the defence on which they will rely, and advise them which documents you intend to rely on (receipt, photos of signage, PSIA etc).

Many thanks - I will wait to hear back from the Land Owner too, and from the Bank. If it comes to a Court Case, I have the photos ready and armed, so will be including those.

I get the feeling any more letters sent to the PPC will get me an equally "intelligent" response - but I hear you on showing the Court I did all I could to get this settled with the PPC BEFORE taking Court Action.

These people sure don't give up your money easily do they?!!

headpin

I think you will find Quality Foods is the trading name of L B Enterprises Ltd. If you are going to Court you need to check and ensure you get the correct company name. I do not believe that Iceland have any involvement here and that the car park is owned by L B Enterprises Ltd. It's worth a few quid to get the Land Registry Information.

Good luck and kick a*se

makara

headpin wrote: »

I think you will find Quality Foods is the trading name of L B Enterprises Ltd.

Thanks, looks like you are right -

http://www.quality-foods.co.uk/termscond.htm