Premier Solicitors - Letter Before Claim

JackBasta

Hi All,

I've received one of these letters, and I've trawled the forums looking for answers, but I'm a little confused so hope I can get some with my own thread.

I've received a letter before claim from Premier Solicitors on behalf of Total Parking Solutions. They are asking for money as they say "the driver was observed leaving site whilst the vehicle remained parked on premises". They say they had clear signage that this was in contravention to the terms.

It goes on to say "If we do not receive payment of the outstanding sum by the deadline stated, our client will have no option than to commence formal Civil Proceedings against you and will do so without further reference to you."

I've ignored previous letters, but my research tells me that a letter before claim is where is starts to get serious, so I have a few questions.

1. Just because the letter is entitled "Letter Before Claim", is that an actual proper LBCCJ that I need to worry about? There's no formal court papers included or anything. Just pretty much the same as what I've received in the past, but with that title on top, and the same demand for money.

2. If they had photographic evidence of our car going into a car park at a certain time, and then coming out at a certain time, and the time elapsed was in violation of their limits, then I get that they have evidence that you overstayed. But "observed leaving the car in the car park"? What type of evidence would they have for that? One person's word? Will that stand up in court? The driver could've been putting something in the bin! Should I demand to see photographic or video evidence?

Thanks for you help

Jack

Herzlos

It sounds like you need to treat it as a formal Letter Before Claim, and respond the same as any other LBC on here.

The only evidence that they could have about leaving the site would be photographs or a witness statement. The witness would need need to be present to give it any credibility, and then all you need to do is ask "Since you supposedly watched me leave the site, why didn't you tell me it was against the supposed contract, instead of allowing the infraction to occur?" to which they'll have no good answer.

You've then got all of the usual points - was the signage clear enough to have definitely formed a contract? Does the signage imply there's a charge for leaving the site or does it forbid it? Do they have any evidence it was actually you that left the site? Did they comply with POFA2012 to make you liable as keeper? Is there any commercial justification for this penalty, as per Beavis?

I've only seen one leaving site claim make it to court, and the parking company (VCS?) were warned that if they did it again their lawyers should "bring [their] toothbrushes" i.e. They'd be getting a custodial stay for contempt of court.

JackBasta

That's the response I was hoping for!

So I should email the solicitor (not the PPC).

I should tell them that I believe the debt is deniable due to a failure to mitigate their costs. If the driver was observed leaving the site, why were the costs not mitigated by informing the driver that the contract was being breached at the time, instead of just allowing the infraction to occur.

I should also point them towards VCS v Ibbotson (i've just read that - it's hilarious!)

regarding the other points, clear signage, POFA2012 etc. I don't know the answers to those. the actual car park has since closed down.
Should I put all these questions in the email?

Thanks

Jack

Coupon-mad

Not questions, it's fairly pointless.

Just state that there is no evidence of any such contravention by the driver, who will not be named, so their client will have to rely upon schedule 4 of the POFA 2012. Since TPS do not fully comply with the statute in the wording of their Notice to Keeper letters, as registered keeper you cannot be held liable. This contact is harassment of the wrong party and any claim would be vexatious and unreasonable.

End by saying do not insult me by citing the ParkingEye v Beavis case as if it applies across the board to justify all private parking charges, because many cases have been successfully defended since that November 2015 decision. That case turned on unique facts including clear signage and an accepted contract with an admitted driver. Nothing like this situation where the client doesn't even have any evidence of any contravention occurring, let alone evidence of clear terms on signs.

Or use Gan's letter he's just written on pepipoo here; as always a great letter from Gan:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=106728

I can see that's also your thread as the first post matches.

Go with Gan's suggestion.

JackBasta

Cheers. Thanks for all your help!

JackBasta

Hi,

I wrote that letter and have just had a reply from Premier Solicitors. They have confirmed that the notice is valid and remains payable based upon the fact the driver was observed leaving the site which was in breach of the terms.

They say that if they don't recieve the outstanding sum by 19 July, their client will have no option other than to commence Civil Court Proceedings.

They have enclosed pictures of the signage AND of our car with the PCN attached to it. There are no pictures of my wife leaving the premisies.

They have also stated that the right to appeal has now expired as there was no correspondence to their client for the PCN despite "chasing attemtps".

What they HAVEN'T done, is answered the question about mitigation. They have ignored my asking what action was taken to alert the driver leaving the car park.

Should I write back to them again asking for an answer to that question, and maybe point them towards VCS vs Ibbotson?

Or do I just ignore, as it's highly unlikely it'll end up in a court case anyway, because of VCS vs Ibbotson?

Thanks

Jack

Coupon-mad

They have confirmed that the notice is valid and remains payable based upon the fact the driver was observed leaving the site which was in breach of the terms.

They would say that, wouldn't they?!

Or do I just ignore, as it's highly unlikely it'll end up in a court case anyway, because of VCS vs Ibbotson?

Yes you could ignore, or respond again, particularly if you have an email address you may as well start some email tennis to keep them busy and stop the case progressing.

They have enclosed pictures of the signage AND of our car with the PCN attached to it.

PPCs always, always have those photos.

There are no pictures of my wife leaving the premises.

PPCs never have that evidence!

Hkt

Hi OP

Can I ask what you did in the end, and whether anything came of their threats?

Thanks