PE LBC again!

Bobsmithers

Well, the usual culprits are at it again and have not failed to surprise me with their incompetence!

Let me explain. I have following the advice on this forum following the issue of a PCN by PE. Kept quiet until the first LBCC. Then responded requesting the information entitled to under the Practice Direction. A PE letter followed advising that they would pursue the matter in court. No information that I am entitled to has been received. Their letter included some obvious issues.

They claimed they had sent me an LBA but in fact, had sent a LBCC. They also got the name of the retail park incorrect.

I then sent a 2nd request for information in order to be able to provide a full response in line with the Practice Direction.

PE, in their wisdom, have completed ignored my second letter and issued another LBCC. Unbelievable! Interestingly, the second LBCC appears identical to the first.

Reading the many posts here it would appear that I simply continue to request the information.

Is this the best course of action still? Do I simply re write my previous communications and respond?

One final point - why do these rogues continue to be used to "mis" manage private car parks? Something has to be done!

Thanks!

Coupon-mad

I would again respond - and word it in such a critical and clear way that you'd be happy to show the letter in court and expose their misleading and muddled tactics.

And what about complaining assertively to the retail park/management or landowner?

zzzLazyDaisy

Can I just be clear about this (sorry for being dense....).

The sequence of letters from our friends is:

LBCCC
Second letter
LBCCC

If that's right, could you please post the second letter? (I have seen one recent template reply to an acknowledgment and just want to check yours is the same).

Once we have got that far, I'll pm you a letter to send to the scammers.

In the meantime, do follow C-M's advice to contact the retail park management / landowner - hopefully you will see them off and get into her Hall of Fame

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4766249

(Have a browse, you may even spot 'your' retail park there...)

Daisy

Bobsmithers

Ok. I can do that. Their letter templates are a mess. I asked for a personal response in both of my two previous letters. They are rude.

I had not considered involving the owner of the car park. I will look into it.

Can you tell me if they can start court proceedings without issuing a PD compliant to me? I cannot respond in line with the PD without the info I am entitled to?

Thanks again!

Bobsmithers

Correct LazyDaisy.

PE: Non Compliant LBCC
Me: Request for info
PE: letter without requested info
Me: 2nd request for info
PE: Non Compliant LBCC

At no point have they attempted to provide the info that the PD states I am entitled to.

Detail of the 2nd LBCC to follow.

Thanks!

zzzLazyDaisy

Bobsmithers wrote: »

Can you tell me if they can start court proceedings without issuing a PD compliant to me? I cannot respond in line with the PD without the info I am entitled to?

Thanks again!

The Practice Direction states that the Claimant (PE) must provide a compliant letter before claim, and then the parties must follow the steps set out in the PD before the claimant starts proceedings.

But if a defendant fails to respond to the LBCCC then the PD states the claimant is presumed to have complied with its obligations and may proceed with court action. PE are issuing hundreds of claims each week - mostly, it seems, to ignorers. That is why it is so important not to miss the deadline for sending the acknowledgment, and to continue to comply with deadlines as they arise.

The letters that you have received so far form part of the court documents if this case ever goes to court. My own view is that only an idiot would be willing to go to court knowing that this would result in their incompetence and/or refusal to comply with court directions would be produced to the judge.

The problem is..... we can't be certain that we are not dealing with idiots...

I'll wait for you to post up the second letter from them (remove all identifying details) and we'll take it from there.

Daisy

Edit - just as a matter of interest, is this a case where you would be able to calculate a loss? By this I mean, say the parking fee was £1 per hour and you paid for 2 hrs but you were half an hour late getting back to the car, then you could say that their 'loss' was 50p (or £1 depending on how you look at it). I don't need to know how much the amount might be, just if this is such a case.

Also, any chance that you still have proof of purchase (receipts, guarantees, credit card statement)?

Bobsmithers

The car park is free for first three hours. No standard parking charges.

No proof of spending on that date. Worth noting that I use the car park regularly and spend a lot of money in the various retail outlets. These include some very big names like M&S, Boots and Next.

I am working on the letter detail. I don't seem to be able to attach scanned docs so retyping.

One thing worth noting is that there are some slight differences between the 1st and 2nd LBCC. Main difference on front page - PE have included a sentence stating "This charge is levied for breach of contract". They go on to say "The full facts of this case have already been provided on the first two Parking Charge Notices that were sent to you".

Also, on the rear of the letter (Further info) they now state that they "remain open to Alternate Dispute Resolution, and (Parking Eye) suggests that this takes place directly between the two parties on a without prejudice basis."

There is then a little more waffle about there pre-estimate of loss with some minor differences.

zzzLazyDaisy

Bobsmithers wrote: »

One thing worth noting is that there are some slight differences between the 1st and 2nd LBCC. Main difference on front page - PE have included a sentence stating "This charge is levied for breach of contract".

That's interesting - it is the first LBCCC that I have come across that clearly states the basis of the claim as being BofC (usually we have to dig for it)

Also, on the rear of the letter (Further info) they now state that they "remain open to Alternate Dispute Resolution, and (Parking Eye) suggests that this takes place directly between the two parties on a without prejudice basis."

Call me psychic, but I am guessing that they are not offering a POPLA code?


There is then a little more waffle about there pre-estimate of loss with some minor differences.

Thanks, that's useful.

D

Bobsmithers

Text on front page:

Dear Sir / Madam,

LETTER BEFORE COUNTY COURT CLAIM

On the Day Month Year we notified you that, as the registered keeper of this vehicle, you had become liable for this Parking Charge Notice (see above reference), which was a breach of the terms and conditions at Parking Location, on the Day Month Year. This charge is therefore levied for breach of contract. This was because the requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedom's Act 2012 required for Keeper Liability had been satisfied. Further to this, we advised you that the amount payable was £100.00 for the Parking Charge Notice and that you were required to make this payment or further action would be taken. The full facts of this case have already been provided on the first two Parking Charge Notices that were sent to you.

ParkingEye is still not in receipt of this payment. As such, we must inform you that unless payment of £100.00 is made within the next 14 days further action will be taken and court proceedings will be issued, which will incur further costs. These costs will include, but are not limited to £50.00 solicitor's costs and £15.00 court claim issue fee.

Your faithfully

ParkingEye Legal Department

Bobsmithers

Front page text of 2nd letter now posted.

You are correct about POPLA code. No sign of that or how to instigate ADR.

Also, they are claiming that info relating to the claim was provided in the two PCNs. Not as far as the PD is concerned.

If you need text from Further Information (back page) and/or text of the first letter then let me know.

Thanks

Stroma

If they remain open to alternate resolution, inform them as they have industry resolution service available, ask them to supply you with a popla code so that can be used.