Unique situation? - Cp Plus and Debt Recovery Plus

Jamin_Berry

Hello Ladies and Gentlemen,

I may have got myself into a pickle.

I have fully read the Newbies article here:
(I cant post the link because im a newbie, other newbies find it stickied at the top of the forum)
And I understand it. However... I did not read it in September when I got the first CP Plus letters and I read all the old threads saying to ignore. I am now in a somewhat unique situation.

Whilst not entirely important here is what happened:
I was part of a convoy that stopped at Roadchef Norton Canes after a breakdown. Three vehicles stayed (my car, my company van and a friend) and one left to get parts. We have now have three claims for the three that overstayed from CP Plus and Debt Recovery.

I ignored and destroyed all correspondence for my personal ticket and my company tickets(as I didnt see the point in keeping them from what I had read). I did not reply or do anything expect ignore and destroy the letters. I did not keep any receipts from the services although we did use them.

I decided to double check my ignore strategy today after receiving another letter from Debt Recovery Plus Ltd to work (for the company van) and noticed Coupon-Mad's signature saying to ignore the old ignore strategy in an old thread that comes up on google.

So as the situation stands I have three ignored claims dating from parking on 12/09/2013. One which I am personally liable for, one my company and one my friend (for which I am the only reason he was there). I am obviously past the silly appeal window for CP Plus.

From what I have read I can do a refresh with the works van as it is registered to work and there is no persons name. But the other two vehicles were driven by their registered keepers. Am I to send a naming the driver(even if its the same?!) letter to the claimant anyway?(Dont want to lie?!) And then go for a popla number? Or since I am so far down the line should I just continue to ignore and advise my friend to do the same? Then if a court summons comes then do some work on it?

Please note none of the cases have received an actual court claim yet, despite many letters threatening them.

Many thanks for your help.

BrightonandHove

You should name the drivers ( with their knowledge ) and then soft appeal as the driver. You will then get POPLA appeal codes at which point you should come back here with your outline POPLA appeal fro checking.

Jamin_Berry

BrightonandHove wrote: »

You should name the drivers ( with their knowledge ) and then soft appeal as the driver. You will then get POPLA appeal codes at which point you should come back here with your outline POPLA appeal fro checking.

That seems like the most logical way forward. Will it matter that the registered keeper and drivers are the same?

Cheers

BrightonandHove

No - because you're not going to tell them !

bod1467

Obvious the registered keepers can't name themselves as the drivers. But if others are willing to be "the drivers on that day" then name those persons and so reset the POPLA clock.

Or .... just continue to ignore. There's a link in some threads that provides a list of which PPCs have raised court action in the last 12 months (an FOI request). I don't think CPP are particularly litigious.

Jamin_Berry

BrightonandHove wrote: »

No - because you're not going to tell them !

But they have sent their prior letters to "Davey Jones" @ My house. And poor old Davey was the driver as well as the registered keeper.

Does the driver need to be a different person to the registered keeper to do a refresh via driver?

EDIT: bod1467 got there

BrightonandHove

Jamin_Berry wrote: »

But they have sent their prior letters to "Davey Jones" @ My house. And poor old Davey was the driver as well as the registered keeper.

Does the driver need to be a different person to the registered keeper to do a refresh via driver?

EDIT: bod1467 got there

Just give them a driver of the same surname but at the same address.

bod1467

Out of time for appealing. (I actually read the OP). So naming "the driver" discharges RK liability.

hoohoo

I wouldn't advise lying. You could get Huhned.

Get rid of the company car one by naming the driver.

My controversial advice is to appeal the other ones anyway. This sets you in good stead if they ever do court.

Currently, they don't though.

Appeal strategy is:
1) Write to DRP saying debt is denied, do not contact me again or I will report you to the CSA
2) Write to CP Plus appealingthat their charge is not a genuine pre-estiate of loss andthey have not contract with the landowner
3) When they say you are out of time write back saying that you have been threatened with court action, so this is against practice directions. Order them to cease all further communications apart from cancelling charge or initiating court action via a letter before claim which complies with practice directions.

If drp writes again, report them to the CRA

if cp plus write again, report them to the bpa.


...or ignore :-)

bod1467

BrightonandHove wrote: »

Just give them a driver of the same surname but at the same address.

You must have done a stealth edit as I was replying, as this was NOT what your post originally said.

Jamin_Berry

So is my only real choice now to continue to ignore?