Letter Before Claim - Reply

LiamD89

Hi Guys,

I stupidly took the advice of the person driving my car at the time of the charge notice, and we've been ignoring the letters sent, I've now received a LBC :whistle:

I have sent an email to the "solicitors" who wrote to me (Premier Solicitors) to name the person driving as it wasn't actually me at the time.

They have sent a reply, which is kind of confusing... It doesn't acknowledge the fact I have now named the driver, the letter reads: -

We can confirm that our client maintains the PCN is valid and remains payable. This is based upon: (No where in my initital reply did I dispute the PCN)

They reiterate the fact the overstay was for 17 mins, the free time is 2 hours, they include the dates of the letters they claim to of sent. The letter goes on to say that as no attempt has been made to liaise with the client or to lodge an appeal the matter has been passed to them and that appeal time has passed (unless i've misread the info on here, the time hasn't passed and they aren't conforming to the regulations? is that true? or have I mis-read?)

The letter states some protection of freedoms act 2012 and states that after 28 days the client can pursue the RK if drivers details aren't provided, is that correct?

Apologies for another thread about this. :T

If it makes any difference the date of the PCN is around April 2015

Thanks :beer:

Edit - to add the parking company is total parking solutions

bod1467

And the solicitors are ... ?

Small Claims Solicitors?
Miah Solicitors?
Wright Hassell?

LiamD89

Premier Solicitors.

Just noticed it was typed incorrectly above.

Cheers

The_Slithy_Tove

LiamD89 wrote: »

The letter states some protection of freedoms act 2012 and states that after 28 days the client can pursue the RK if drivers details aren't provided, is that correct?

Only up until such time that the keeper (you) tell them who the driver was, as long as legal proceedings have not commenced, which they have not. You therefore TELL them that, as the driver's name and address is known to them, that is who they must now deal with, and you will consider any further communication with you as harrassment and an aggressive commercial practice, i.e. illegal.

LiamD89

legal proceedings haven't begun yet, they want payment by 8/12/15. I shall write them another email, is there any need to quote any particular legislation or just go with what you mentioned?

Thanks

Half_way

You should also tell them that as you have named the driver, any further letters from them to you demanding payment and/or threatening court action will/may incur a charge of £19 or part thereof

LiamD89

I am writing to you to acknowledge the letter you sent dated 26/11/15, you have mentioned on the reply in point 4 that the time to lodge an appeal has passed. This is not what I am doing, I have given you the name of the person who was driving the vehicle at the alleged time.

Any further threats from yourself to me will be considered harassment and an aggressive commercial practice.

I look forward to receiving confirmation from you that you will cease all further action against me with immediate effect.

is that a suitable enough reply?

thanks

Umkomaas

Your letter naming the driver needs to go to the PPC not the solicitors. I'd send a top copy to the PPC with a cc to the sols.

It is the PPC you have to put on notice for this; the solicitors can't issue a notice to driver, only the PPC.

LiamD89

ah, dont I feel stupid now

LiamD89

automated reply as follows: -

Thank you for your email; this is an automatically generated response, your appeal has not yet been read.
*Please note: Appeals must be submitted within 28 days from the notification to driver/keeper and if received outside of the applicable 28 days (as per the appeals procedure) your appeal will not be accepted*

I assume they just try the 28 days thing and see who folds and pays up?

Umkomaas

I think I'd also send it snail mail with a free certificate of posting from the PO counter. Don't send recorded/signed for as some PPCs refuse to accept.