Parking Ticket Help

Anjunadeep

Thanks bazster. I've sent the reply.

I know this isn't an easy question to answer, but would they even bother taking me to court over £50?

Redx

The charge is a pre-estimated amount based on the losses my client suffers as result of the driver’s breach of contract. For example, the cost of employing staff to monitor the car parking areas, the cost of cameras to give to staff as well as printing, administration and maintenance costs.

they obviously havent a clue about GPEOL either

those are general running costs and are the same whether or not the driver parked there or not , gpeol are costs raised due to the breach and any subsequent recovery costs, so say the price of a ticket and the costs to recover this ticket price from the driver (or from the RK)

as for pursuing people, they could pursue the keeper on POFA 2012 if they complied with it, otherwise they can only pursue the driver which is why they always want the drivers details

Coupon-mad

Anjunadeep wrote: »

Thanks bazster. I've sent the reply.

I know this isn't an easy question to answer, but would they even bother taking me to court over £50?

Yes Trethowans do try court but the last one I recall they crashed and burned. In your case as long as you remain in 'registered keeper mode' you are not liable. They cannot invoke POFA Schedule 4 without meeting the second and third condition for keeper liability.

BenefitMaster

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Yes Trethowans do try court but the last one I recall they crashed and burned. In your case as long as you remain in 'registered keeper mode' you are not liable. They cannot invoke POFA Schedule 4 without meeting the second and third condition for keeper liability.

Though I'd be happy enough to be named as Driver, and see how they like facing up againt me :rotfl:

Guys_Dad

Their letter saying what is included in their GPEOL is a PPC's suicide note!

Are these clowns pretending to be some form of solicitors???

I would go with BenefitMaster's offer!!!!! (as long as he posts the results here)

bazster

Guys_Dad wrote: »

Are these clowns pretending to be some form of solicitors???

Well you wouldn't want them to do your conveyancing would you? You'd probably finish up buying the house next door.

Anjunadeep

Got a response today, after I replied stating as they didn't comply with section 4 I didn't need to provide them with the driver details (see bazters post above):

Dear,

Unfortunately I do not agree with your interpretation of the Acts and have set out my client’s position below.

Trethowans applies to the DVLA on behalf of the Trust.

Please note that the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct encourages parties to attempt to resolve matters between themselves without recourse to legal action, which is what I am attempting to do, however despite photographic evidence being sent to you and a request for the divers details to be supplied (if it is not you) you are still refusing to co-operate.

My position is therefore the same as my email dated 07.10.14 below.

Regards,

I'm not sure what to do now, just ignore it or?

Tempted to reply and what 'divers' she is referring to...

Guys_Dad

Tell them that they have not supplied a POPLA code as required and that, if they do not within 7 days, you will appeal direct to POPLA with the full correspondence between you and that you will not enter into any other correspondence with them.

Anjunadeep

In a previous e-mail they stated:

There is no separate independent appeals body as my client is not required to be a member of an Approved Operator Scheme. My client considered your appeal and it was rejected. Should you disagree with their decision the correct appeal channel would be for you to complete your defence when proceedings are issued and a Judge would be the independent body who determines if the debt should be paid.

So I don't think they would have a POPLA code?

Guys_Dad

Anjunadeep wrote: »

In a previous e-mail they stated:



So I don't think they would have a POPLA code?

Yes, sorry, I forgot that.

In that case, you can ignore or reply to the effect that you are looking forward to arguing the wording of POFA in court and will get great satisfaction from you, an amateur, kicking the !!! of a firm of Solicitors in front of a judge who must follow the law.