Letter of claim - BW legal

Turbocat1

I have today received a letter of claim from BW Legal acting on behalf of Vehicle control services. As with many other posters I have acted on outdated advice of ignoring these letters and as such have responded to none from VCS or BW.

The ticket was placed on the vehicle in my residential car park where I live. The driver was parked in a visitor bay, displaying the appropriate permit for the space. However it was parked not fully within the bay. Due to the sizing of the space adjacent it was in no way restricting or blocking parking for any other cars.

The contravention description states ' 'Not parked correctly within the markings of a bay or space'.

There is adequate signage in the car park and a sign is clearly visible in front of the space. Although the wording may not reference the contravention exactly as they have stated on the documentation.

There are various different letter templates on other threads but they vary depending upon what stage in the proceedings you are at.

Does anyone have any advice on the main things I need to cover in a letter of response? They are IPC rather than BPA.

The contravention date was 26th July 2015 not sure if this has any bearing on the response. I have copies of the original Notice to Keeper letter from VCS, as well as the most recent Letter of claim from BWLegal.

Any advice would be gratefully received. I have trawled the various threads for hours including the NEWBIE one but they all seem to be for responding immediately and trying to appeal.

Turbocat1

Also how do I attach the images?

Redx

use one of the recent 2016 letters by GAN (from pepipoo forums) in reply

you cannot attach images here

but you can host them on tinypic or photobucket and then use a dead link to them , changing http to hxxp in your post

ps:- that contravention date is incorrect as its only yesterday !!

but they have 6 years to try a court claim

Turbocat1

Thanks RedX I'll try find one of those. Oops yes that should've been 2015.

Redx

edit post #1 then please

you will find some GAN letters reproduced on here in recent threads on the same topic

look for anything in the last couple of months or so, there will be plenty as BW LEGAL have sent out hundreds of these claims

using the forum search box and suitable search words will help you find them

Turbocat1

I will draft one up and post on here for some opinions. Need to try and pull out the info from previous letters that apply to this case.

Redx

there seem to be a dozen or more threads about VCS/EXCEL/BW LEGAL on page 1 of pepipoo forums , so there must be plenty of user/member GAN posts you can look at

on this MSE forum we get more than a dozen a week on this topic

like this one today https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5499972

or this one from 10 days ago

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5197821

there are DOZENS of posts and threads about it, especially in the last 2 months

there is even a VCS one (liverpool business park) on pepipoo that has progressed to a court claim

Ambrose_Claverhouse

FYI
I received a PCN despite a valid, allowed Blue Badge on display in a familiar car park via the stated T&Cs. Anyway all the usual blah blah has got so far 'Excel' [ a 'rogue company' according to Alan Neale MP for Mansfield ] to say they "require" the BB for checking etc. Despite this frightful audacity; and the rest, I have said this is possible via a £20 fee [ akin to Bank letters etc ] upfront for any A4 copy. They seem stumped now. But I imagine they are sitting there, plotting away behind their dunce's frowns. Someone said they "have the incredulous expression of a primitive tribesman viewing a simple conjuring trick performed by a spiv missionary" [ Google Excel ex-employee forums ] or that they have "a comprehension similar to when a pig looks at a wristwatch" . More later.

BTW I asked Trading Standards, the local Police and my own Home Contents Legal Helpline and they surprisingly advised me that someone can ask for a fee and the other one can choose to pay or not; a bit like a shop.
Also I was advised that if Excel keep demanding without explaining why they shouldn't have to pay etc then I can cite harassment charges and sue for damages. Imagine! The law is so easy. To get the services of a solicitor, apparently all I have to do is pay for it - it's literally that simple; a bit like tea at the Ritz. I imagine Excel know this also but in the interests of balance they might be totally and fully ignorant.

On ITV once in 2016 Phil Scofield said that a friend ignores any of these sorts of things without a problem. Martin Lewis said some communication is a good idea to guard against any accusations of hostility etc. These are good words from clever people. Further to this, one should recall that these are civil actions often with no obvious damage incurred and where no CCTV or photos exist { the BB here was 'unphotographed' which is in itself noteable} one word against another. I imagine the warden was simply mistaken but again in the interests of balance he could be a snide inept chancer trying to 'up' his figures safe in the knowledge that his HQ would go along for the ride. Who knows?
Furthermore, the company claim a final say and/or all decisions are final etc. Well, even the most notorious robbers, murderers or rapists are able to offer complex mitigation. Jeffery Archer, Jonathan Aitken and the Guinness Fraudsters were able to cite mitigating circumstances. Neil Hamilton, proven liar and cited as so by his trial judge was able to re-establish his soiled career in TV & 'albeit' fringe-level politics after his casual attitude towards expenses got him in trouble. I think that Mr Hamilton is a close personal of the MD of Excel but I could be wrong. So, for a small private company run by somewhat unpopular employers to issue specious notices, make demands, ignore contents of replies, create 'official looking' forms is no way to run a ballroom. Just because someone wears a peak cap and struts around a car park like ARP Warden Hodges or Blakey from the touching drama 'On The Buses' it does not follow that they should be encouraged or taken seriously as say Customs and Excise or the Archbishop of York.

Remember what the lawyer said - WHEREVER THERE'S A CLAIM, THERE'S A COUNTERCLAIM.

beamerguy

Ambrose_Claverhouse wrote: »

FYI
I received a PCN despite a valid, allowed Blue Badge on display in a familiar car park via the stated T&Cs. Anyway all the usual blah blah has got so far 'Excel' [ a 'rogue company' according to Alan Neale MP for Mansfield ] to say they "require" the BB for checking etc. Despite this frightful audacity; and the rest, I have said this is possible via a £20 fee [ akin to Bank letters etc ] upfront for any A4 copy. They seem stumped now. But I imagine they are sitting there, plotting away behind their dunce's frowns. Someone said they "have the incredulous expression of a primitive tribesman viewing a simple conjuring trick performed by a spiv missionary" [ Google Excel ex-employee forums ] or that they have "a comprehension similar to when a pig looks at a wristwatch" . More later.

BTW I asked Trading Standards, the local Police and my own Home Contents Legal Helpline and they surprisingly advised me that someone can ask for a fee and the other one can choose to pay or not; a bit like a shop.
Also I was advised that if Excel keep demanding without explaining why they shouldn't have to pay etc then I can cite harassment charges and sue for damages. Imagine! The law is so easy. To get the services of a solicitor, apparently all I have to do is pay for it - it's literally that simple; a bit like tea at the Ritz. I imagine Excel know this also but in the interests of balance they might be totally and fully ignorant.

On ITV once in 2016 Phil Scofield said that a friend ignores any of these sorts of things without a problem. Martin Lewis said some communication is a good idea to guard against any accusations of hostility etc. These are good words from clever people. Further to this, one should recall that these are civil actions often with no obvious damage incurred and where no CCTV or photos exist { the BB here was 'unphotographed' which is in itself noteable} one word against another. I imagine the warden was simply mistaken but again in the interests of balance he could be a snide inept chancer trying to 'up' his figures safe in the knowledge that his HQ would go along for the ride. Who knows?
Furthermore, the company claim a final say and/or all decisions are final etc. Well, even the most notorious robbers, murderers or rapists are able to offer complex mitigation. Jeffery Archer, Jonathan Aitken and the Guinness Fraudsters were able to cite mitigating circumstances. Neil Hamilton, proven liar and cited as so by his trial judge was able to re-establish his soiled career in TV & 'albeit' fringe-level politics after his casual attitude towards expenses got him in trouble. I think that Mr Hamilton is a close personal of the MD of Excel but I could be wrong. So, for a small private company run by somewhat unpopular employers to issue specious notices, make demands, ignore contents of replies, create 'official looking' forms is no way to run a ballroom. Just because someone wears a peak cap and struts around a car park like ARP Warden Hodges or Blakey from the touching drama 'On The Buses' it does not follow that they should be encouraged or taken seriously as say Customs and Excise or the Archbishop of York.

Remember what the lawyer said - WHEREVER THERE'S A CLAIM, THERE'S A COUNTERCLAIM.

What is your point for hijacking another OP's thread ?

arthurx1234

Ambrose_Claverhouse wrote: »

FYI
I received a PCN despite a valid, allowed Blue Badge on display in a familiar car park via the stated T&Cs. Anyway all the usual blah blah has got so far 'Excel' [ a 'rogue company' according to Alan Neale MP for Mansfield ] to say they "require" the BB for checking etc. Despite this frightful audacity; and the rest, I have said this is possible via a £20 fee [ akin to Bank letters etc ] upfront for any A4 copy. They seem stumped now. But I imagine they are sitting there, plotting away behind their dunce's frowns. Someone said they "have the incredulous expression of a primitive tribesman viewing a simple conjuring trick performed by a spiv missionary" [ Google Excel ex-employee forums ] or that they have "a comprehension similar to when a pig looks at a wristwatch" . More later.

BTW I asked Trading Standards, the local Police and my own Home Contents Legal Helpline and they surprisingly advised me that someone can ask for a fee and the other one can choose to pay or not; a bit like a shop.
Also I was advised that if Excel keep demanding without explaining why they shouldn't have to pay etc then I can cite harassment charges and sue for damages. Imagine! The law is so easy. To get the services of a solicitor, apparently all I have to do is pay for it - it's literally that simple; a bit like tea at the Ritz. I imagine Excel know this also but in the interests of balance they might be totally and fully ignorant.

On ITV once in 2016 Phil Scofield said that a friend ignores any of these sorts of things without a problem. Martin Lewis said some communication is a good idea to guard against any accusations of hostility etc. These are good words from clever people. Further to this, one should recall that these are civil actions often with no obvious damage incurred and where no CCTV or photos exist { the BB here was 'unphotographed' which is in itself noteable} one word against another. I imagine the warden was simply mistaken but again in the interests of balance he could be a snide inept chancer trying to 'up' his figures safe in the knowledge that his HQ would go along for the ride. Who knows?
Furthermore, the company claim a final say and/or all decisions are final etc. Well, even the most notorious robbers, murderers or rapists are able to offer complex mitigation. Jeffery Archer, Jonathan Aitken and the Guinness Fraudsters were able to cite mitigating circumstances. Neil Hamilton, proven liar and cited as so by his trial judge was able to re-establish his soiled career in TV & 'albeit' fringe-level politics after his casual attitude towards expenses got him in trouble. I think that Mr Hamilton is a close personal of the MD of Excel but I could be wrong. So, for a small private company run by somewhat unpopular employers to issue specious notices, make demands, ignore contents of replies, create 'official looking' forms is no way to run a ballroom. Just because someone wears a peak cap and struts around a car park like ARP Warden Hodges or Blakey from the touching drama 'On The Buses' it does not follow that they should be encouraged or taken seriously as say Customs and Excise or the Archbishop of York.

Remember what the lawyer said - WHEREVER THERE'S A CLAIM, THERE'S A COUNTERCLAIM.

Are you any relation to Vicky Pollard?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8WVMAazd0I

Arthur Bexit

Umkomaas

beamerguy wrote: »

What is your point for hijacking another OP's thread ?

I find it an interjection that adds a bit of information not previously seen on a thread:

http://www.indeed.co.uk/cmp/Excel-Parking/reviews

It's certainly no worse than many of your gratuitous rants about 'scammers', 'cowboys', and 'scum' on any thread you can get your hands on.

When living in a glass house, it's really best not to throw stones!:)