PCN with an none completed Date on it

yotmon

q2uantum wrote: »

Ok next part of the saga.

Today I have received a letter from bwlegal dated 21st November
They have included photos of the signs in the car park but these are dated March 3rd 2015 - 2 months after the photos of the car.

Can any background be seen in their photos. Show them to your sister for her to confirm that they are actually situated in her workplace car park. They may be 'stock' photos of their signs from a different location so you need to check them. Don't take anything at face value from these shyters !

q2uantum

Hi All,

Here are some of the pictures they have sent me through

Copy of the PCN (I have editored out the Reg even though it is hardly readable - and also the Serial Number)



Copy of PO's Statement



Photo of the sign in March (2months after the alleged offence)



And 2 random Photos of the car park in March (Again 2 months after the alleged offence), I believe this is when the signs where all upgraded and replaced, as if you see earlier on in the post you will see the damaged sign I posted from February.





Do you recommend I reply back to their last letter stating I still deny liability etc or sit it out?

Thanks again for all the help so far guys.

I aint giving in to this!

Cheers

q2

Coupon-mad

If the 'officer' is going to retrospectively allege that he saw the 'valve positions' of the tyres had not changed (does it say this?) then like Councils do, they would need evidence of this. i.e. two timed photos of the valves of the same tyre shown to be in the same place xx hours apart.

Is that so-called statement dated?

earlier on in the post you will see the damaged sign I posted from February.

Good. I am glad you have that evidence. Show that to them, deny liability and show your evidence and criticise theirs, ask for the ''officer's'' photos of the wheel valves because it seems that statement was written and drawn later. And as well as photos of the wheel valve position, ask for the photos actually taken of the signs as they were on the day (as is required under the Code of Practice, as basic evidence).

Never let them have the last word, is my motto with these pre-court solicitor letters.

q2uantum

Hi Coupon-Mad,

The PO Statement actually reads (And its difficult to read it)

"Parked in a permit only are without a valid permit"

I can not see any date on the Statement and the Date on the PCN actually reads /1/15 i.e it has no Day on it.

Should I write/email back something like the following.


Dear BW Legal,

In regards to your recent correspondence dated 21st November, which includes photographs of the signage and also copies of the PCN and PO's Statement.

My position on this incident is still unchanged, as the registered keeper of the vehicle I am still not liable for this excessive charge that you are trying to impose. The evidence you have sent through is pretty woeful for these reasons.

1) The PCN does not have a complete date on it - it states /1/15 - there is no day.

2)The PO's statement you have sent through is not displaying a date at all, so what proves when this was written?

3)The photographs of this signage are from 2 months after the alleged offence, and do not prove there was clear and readable signage - please provide copies of the signage on the alleged day as is required under the Code Of Conduct you are supposed to adhere to.

Here are a couple of my own pictures that show that the signage in that car park is not kept in good condition.





4) You have not yet shown any proof that you have the landowners consent to "police" this car park, please supply some sort of proof of this.

Might I suggest you stop and file the matter once and for all, because your client has no cause of action and no demonstrable contract formed by a sign which seems to be routinely covered in ivy or damaged.

Regards

Please feel free to offer any suggestions or amendments to it as I am not the best at writing things down

Thanks

q2

Coupon-mad

Looks great to me, and very reasonable that you are showing your evidence openly up front to counter their rubbish. If it goes to a hearing you need the Judge onside and this looks fine to me.

q2uantum

Thanks Coupon-Mad,

What are your recommendations on email v letter ? Which should be the preferred correspondence? I have done a mixture of both up to now.

Regards

q2

Umkomaas

Send both. Get free cert of posting from the PO. My view is that formal correspondence should be produced on paper.