PCN vinci now solicitors letter from Wright Hassall

bazster

debsydoodah wrote: »

Howsoever, in the unlikely event that WH really has got a solicitor to write to you then this too is good: either the solicitor has done it for nothing (which hurts for a lawyer!), or they've charged ZZPS £50 for it! Either way someone is going to wonder why they are bothering.

You need to forward this latest letter to the SRA as supplementary evidence of WH threatening legal action on behalf of someone (ZZPS) who it knows perfectly well is the wrong party.

I have only received verbal confirmation that WH are instructed so still waiting on the letter before firing off the complaint letter as suggested:o

Really heartened by the advice from those much more switched on than me - one thing I would like to know as I have more than one PCN to deal with, is in the UNLIKELY event that I do end up having to face court proceedings - which I would do rather than pay these bullies, do they have to deal with each ticket separately or would they look to lump them together?

Please keep to your own thread, things get very confusing if we have to deal with two cases in one thread.

parkingnuts

Bobo. Quick question, how many days between the alleged offense and the date the PCN came through the post? Did they post a ticket on the windscreen? If you had a windscreen ticket, and there is more than 56 days between the date of the offense and the notice to keeper then this is an invalid ticket and WH can get lost.

Secondly, look up the rules for time limits that apply dependent on when ticketed by various means. Work out which method they have banged you for the see if they've followed the law.

Then, if not, ask the DVLA for a freedom of information request asking them the date that Vinci asked for you keeper details to be released. If Vinci or zzps applied for the data 56 days after the offense then they have knowingly chased you for an invalid debt - and you could sue them for harassment and distress.

They tried the same with me in Cardiff as well. And they lost, I am in the process of seeking punitive damages.

Bobo88

Parking nuts, I knew this was something I should've asked earlier. I had a windscreen ticket on 23/09/14, the NTK letter came through my door on the 27/12/14.
When I suggested to them that this was not in the legal time frame they quashed it.

Thanks for the info

ManxRed

Bobo88 wrote: »

Parking nuts, I knew this was something I should've asked earlier. I had a windscreen ticket on 23/09/14, the NTK letter came through my door on the 27/12/14.
When I suggested to them that this was not in the legal time frame they quashed it.

Thanks for the info

They quashed it?

They have no powers with which to over-rule legislation, so how on earth did they do this?

Captain_Leaky

I am assuming that he actually means that he contacted the PPC directly, who then cancelled it.

ManxRed

Ah, OK. Hopefully that is what it means.

debsydoodah

parkingnuts wrote: »

Bobo. Quick question, how many days between the alleged offense and the date the PCN came through the post? Did they post a ticket on the windscreen? If you had a windscreen ticket, and there is more than 56 days between the date of the offense and the notice to keeper then this is an invalid ticket and WH can get lost.

Secondly, look up the rules for time limits that apply dependent on when ticketed by various means. Work out which method they have banged you for the see if they've followed the law.

Then, if not, ask the DVLA for a freedom of information request asking them the date that Vinci asked for you keeper details to be released. If Vinci or zzps applied for the data 56 days after the offense then they have knowingly chased you for an invalid debt - and you could sue them for harassment and distress.

They tried the same with me in Cardiff as well. And they lost, I am in the process of seeking punitive damages.

I have a ticket 29.09.14 registered keeper notice sent out on 5th December so outside 56 day window but Vinci say still valid as I confirmed I was the driver - however this was only after receiving the RKN - is this right?

ManxRed

Vinci are right. The falling outside 56 days only means they can no longer hold the Registered Keeper liable.

As they know who the driver was then they no longer need to rely on RK liability.

Why did you tell them who was driving?

debsydoodah

ManxRed wrote: »

Vinci are right. The falling outside 56 days only means they can no longer hold the Registered Keeper liable.

As they know who the driver was then they no longer need to rely on RK liability.

Why did you tell them who was driving?

My employer pays for the space I park in with a permit - they rang when I received a RKN on an earlier ticket (first chase ever) - had mentioned ticket but they said to ignore as space paid for anyway - POPLA appeal launched by my employer but lacked substance - POPLA wont speak to me now:cool:

The_Slithy_Tove

debsydoodah wrote: »

My employer pays for the space I park in with a permit - they rang when I received a RKN on an earlier ticket (first chase ever) - had mentioned ticket but they said to ignore as space paid for anyway - POPLA appeal launched by my employer but lacked substance - POPLA wont speak to me now:cool:

If you want to discuss your own case, rather than help the OP with his, can you start your own thread, please? Else it's very confusing to determine what advice/comments applies to whom.