Excel Parking - I wasn't the driver!

sandyb113

Hi, hope you can help.

In November 2010 my car (i wasn't driving) had pictures taken of it entering and leaving an excel car park in the west midlands. The car wasn't parked and the engine wasn't turned off, basically someone was dropping my son 3 year old son off and basically he got out of one car and got in my car! The first I realised something wasn't right was 2 months later I got a Fine and a bad picture of a car 'Arriving and Leaving' from Excel saying I hadn't paid to park! Demanding £60 in 14 days!!

After looking on the threads here I decided to use the template letter "I wasn't the driver" which a wasn't... I was actually about 15 miles away at work without about 30 people to confirm this!!

I sent of the letter but received a letter back from Excel saying by law I had to tell the who was driving??? I sent the next letter to them stating the same and sending a copy of the original letter.. I then got a reply from Roxburghe... chasing me for £140.00!! Totally ignoring the fact I wasn't the driver saying I was liable as the owner/keeper.... I ignored this letter now I've had a letter from Graham White Solicitors with usual threats of court action but with the added paragraph about consumer forums giving out of date an wrong advice???? Now Im a little worried??? has anything changed??? I wasn't the driver and I can prove that and I didn't think I had to say who was???

Then just to add to everything I had a card come from GCM - Airport House, Purley Way addessed to the ocupier with a consignment No. (it looks like a package delivery card) asking to phone urgently?? Ive looked these up and they are tracers/debt collectors???:( One has also gone to another address I lived at??? I don't have any outstanding debts so are these connected???

Im now a little worried and hope Im doing the right thing????

Thank You!

Sirdan

sandyb113 wrote: »

Hi, hope you can help.

In November 2010 my car (i wasn't driving) had pictures taken of it entering and leaving an excel car park in the west midlands. The car wasn't parked and the engine wasn't turned off, basically someone was dropping my son 3 year old son off and basically he got out of one car and got in my car! The first I realised something wasn't right was 2 months later I got a Fine and a bad picture of a car 'Arriving and Leaving' from Excel saying I hadn't paid to park! Demanding £60 in 14 days!!

After looking on the threads here I decided to use the template letter "I wasn't the driver" which a wasn't... I was actually about 15 miles away at work without about 30 people to confirm this!!

I sent of the letter but received a letter back from Excel saying by law I had to tell the who was driving??? I sent the next letter to them stating the same and sending a copy of the original letter.. I then got a reply from Roxburghe... chasing me for £140.00!! Totally ignoring the fact I wasn't the driver saying I was liable as the owner/keeper.... I ignored this letter now I've had a letter from Graham White Solicitors with usual threats of court action but with the added paragraph about consumer forums giving out of date an wrong advice???? Now Im a little worried??? has anything changed??? I wasn't the driver and I can prove that and I didn't think I had to say who was???

Then just to add to everything I had a card come from GCM - Airport House, Purley Way addessed to the ocupier with a consignment No. (it looks like a package delivery card) asking to phone urgently?? Ive looked these up and they are tracers/debt collectors???:( One has also gone to another address I lived at??? I don't have any outstanding debts so are these connected???

Im now a little worried and hope Im doing the right thing????

Thank You!

Firstly, you should continue to ignore Excel and Roxburgh and the bloke at the next desk in Roxburgh who is Graham White.

However if their letters clearly state that you must in law tell them who was driving then I would report this to the OFT and the BPA as it is quite simply a LIE.
If Roxburgh are clearly stating that the keeper/owner is liable this is also a lie and should be reported to the OFT.
The OFT are considering revoking Roxburgh's license so any incidents of deliberate deception like this should be forwarded to them in order to help them make the right decision !

vax2002

Yes keep ignoring.
They may try to phone you as well if you have a landline.
Remember it is your phone, stay in charge of the call.
Do not confirm your name Until :
Ask the caller to state who they are
Ask the reason they are calling
If they refuse spouting data protection, just say, funny that, same rules apply here and hang up.
If they Do say who it is and why, hang up and keep hanging up without conforming your identity, see who gives in first.

You did not leave the bullies behind when you left school, they are just as many out here in the big bad world.
You should expect around 3 or 4 more letters with more threats and bluster, then they get fed up and move on.
In the extremely unlikely event of receiving stamped court papers, come back and someone will direct you to the crucifixion section where these Idiots get their !!!!!! tanned by your defence.
And no you do not have to tell them who was driving the car, you do not have any legal duty or responsibility to communicate with them in any way shape or form.

steve1500

Rubbish - You are not required to tell them who the driver was. Only a judge can order a person to spill the beans. If you don't spill the beans & you are being done by the POLICE or COUNCIL then the registered keepers cops for it.

AlexisV

Ignore these clowns, but out of interest when you say they said "by law I had to tell the who was driving???" what did they say EXACTLY?

esmerobbo

AlexisV wrote: »

Ignore these clowns, but out of interest when you say they said "by law I had to tell the who was driving???" what did they say EXACTLY?

Indeedy I would love to hear what law they are quoting there!

Coblcris

I would send copies of all correspondence to the Solicitors Regulation Authority with a specific complaint about G.White and also send copies of of all correspondence to Trading Standards along with specific complaints about all the companies involved.
West Midlands Trading Standards are quite clued up about PPCs and have have taken action in the past.

sandyb113

Hi thanks for all your advice!

The letter I received about passing on the driver details reads as follows:

In response to your correspondence dated @/@/11 we acknowledge your statement that you are the registered keeper however you were not the driver on the @@/@@/10 when the parking contravention was committed.

In the view of this fact we request you provide us with the name and address of the driver in charge of the vehicle on the said date so that we may pursue this matter of the outstanding charge accordingly. Pursuant to paragraph 4.2 of the pre-action protocol, we must advise you that this is a reasonable request in order that we may undertake the early and full exchange of information about the prospective legal claim and enable the driver the opportunity to avoid civil proceedings by settling the charge before commencement of proceedings.

Failure to provide the information as requested may constitute a non-compliance of the pre-action protocols and could result on court proceedings being brought against the vehicle registered keeper and judgement obtained for failing to adhere to said protocols and liability for the charge outstanding.

Furthermore as the registered keeper of a vehicle you are legally required under the road traffic act to ensure that any vehicle legally registered to you, if not driven by you, is driven by a person to which you have given consent and can verify that they are legally licenced and insured to do so.

Hmm after actually re-reading and typing there's a lot of 'may's' on their threats!!

The letter from roxburghe had this paragraph at the end..

We are fully aware of anecdotal information being presented via the Internet and on various websites and you may well feel this guidance is worth following. We strongly urge you to seek independent legal advice rather than rely on these opinions, and we would respectively suggest you refer to the civil procedure rules part 31*, and more specifically parts 31.16 and 31.17.

Anyone know what those are???

The last letter I had from graham White actually says that are chasing payment because there is an absence of a valid appeal? Surely, I wasn't the driver is an appeal?

Thank you all for your advice so far think I'll just sit tight, I haven't got a house phone registered in my name (only mobile) so I'll see what calls I get!!

trisontana

A load of lies. For a start "civil procedure rules part 31*, and more specifically parts 31.16 and 31.17." does not apply to the Small Claims Track. Secondly, who is allowed and who is insured to drive the vehicle is no business of the parking company. Who do they think they are, the police or the DVLA? Of course they are not. They are just a bunch a private citizens with no more power than you or I.

fb1969

sandyb113 wrote: »

we would respectively suggest you refer to the civil procedure rules part 31*, and more specifically parts 31.16 and 31.17.

Anyone know what those are???

Oh that old male-cow-poo again!

The Civil Procedure Rules are here http://www.justice.gov.uk/guidance/courts-and-tribunals/courts/procedure-rules/civil/contents/parts/part31.htm In order to read 31.16 and 31.17 you will see 31.1(2) which states "This Part applies to all claims except a claim on the small claims track" - any action they ever did take against you would be through the small claims court. So they actually highlight what an idle threat this is while trying to scare you!

esmerobbo

Oh that old claptrap as usual. Picked a few paragraphs from a teach yourself law book. Unfortunately non of them have any relevance.

They really do need to take the legal section away from the sixth former, and let them get back to the PlayStation!