BW Legal Excel Peel Centre from 2012

jameseyre1

Hi all,

We've had letters over a few months from BW Legal over a 2012 PCN from the Peel Centre. Unfortunately, at the time, my wife did ID herself as the driver as she did have a valid ticket which she sent to Excel. They responded at the time to say "it wasn't on display".


We didn't hear anything else until August this year when BW started harassing us, sending pictures of the car/PCN copies, then signage from the Peel Centre from 2015 (!) once we responded about size of signage, etc. Our last response via email is below and not heard anything since, though they have phoned twice since, starting the call with "Can we confirm some personal details?" which was met with "Why would we want to confirm any details with you" and phone down.


Any advice? Just sit tight and see what their next move is? The difference from other cases on here is that we did ID the driver, so wonder where we stand in terms of the basis for a potential court defence?


Dear BW Legal,
Further to your latest letter of harassment, my position remains unchanged. I deny any debt to Excel Parking Services Ltd.


The amount charged bears no relation to the parking fee which was paid in full by the driver, as evidenced by the valid parking ticket that was sent to Excel in 2012, a copy of which was included with your correspondence, showing the correct date and time of the alleged event.


My comments on previous correspondence regarding signage at The Peel Centre are also unchanged.
Photos of signage sent with your correspondence are dated August 28th, 2015, more than three years after the alleged event and show nothing of import.


I note your attempt to mislead me regarding your £54 legal costs. As you are aware, these cannot be recovered in the Small Claims court. The Claimant is well aware that CPR 27.14 does not permit such charges to be recovered in the Small Claims court. They are unjustified and should be struck out as unrecoverable.

twhitehousescat

excell , vcs? check the signage at the time http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/bw-legal-misleading-motorists-over-peel.html

Redx

plenty of threads about EXCEL, the PEEL CENTRE and BW LEGAL

just assume its an LBC from BW LEGAL and respond accordingly, using the templates from here or from pepipoo forums that have been used over the last 9 months or so

eventually, they may issue an MCOL before it "times out" as they have 6 years to issue a court case

if the event was before OCT 2012 , then POFA2012 had not arrived , but EXCEL dont use or rely on POFA2012 anyway , which doesnt matter if the driver has been identified

you can probably expect an MCOL from Northampton at some point

you should have kept the paid for ticket and sent a copy , plus taken pictures of the paid for ticket as well , because their systems would have noted the VRM on the ANPR cameras and the computers would have noted the VRM put into the ticket machine

so you could say they knew a valid ticket was bought and with good intentions , so it was either displayed , or it fell in the footwell or whatever (gust of wind , fluttering ticket - signage does not mention how to display it plus they are not sticky backed either)

The_Deep

Why not threaten a counter claim?

twhitehousescat

The_Deep wrote: »

Why not threaten a counter claim?

"Unfortunately, at the time, my wife did ID herself as the driver as she did have a valid ticket which she sent to Excel. They responded at the time to say "it wasn't on display".


the only question here is the level of blindness in a UKPC employee, DPA might be hard on a blindness case


however , do you think that the employee would still be working for them , or remember each individual car ? might be interesting to ask for him as a witness (under oath)

pgoncalv

twhitehousescat wrote: »

however , do you think that the employee would still be working for them , or remember each individual car ? might be interesting to ask for him as a witness (under oath)

:rotfl:
:rotfl:

Coupon-mad

Any advice? Just sit tight and see what their next move is? The difference from other cases on here is that we did ID the driver, so wonder where we stand in terms of the basis for a potential court defence?

You stand on a firm footing like Martin Cutts did re his Peel Centre case in 2011:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/excel_parking_services_ltd_relea#comment-58308

http://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/plcdev/files/126/original/DVLA-BPA-Cutts22Apr2012_1b_mf.pdf

Defences for the Peel Centre which use that case - decision by DJ Lateef at Stockport in 2011 - can be found on this forum by searching 'Cutts Excel Lateef'. I recall writing one which puts Simon Renshaw-Smith on the spot with his widely-reported words about the Judge.

How exactly are Excel evidencing not DISPLAYING, if the PCN was issued by post by ANPR which doesn't look at dashboards when parked? Or was it a rare windscreen PCN on the day?

hoohoo

+1 to coupon mad.

The signage at the peel centre in March 2010 was found to be deficient in Excel v Cutts, so until it was changed, all other cases should follow that lead.

SR-S did not agree with the judgment
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/30Dq1nhqfvfClyLyRk3BZJb/excel-parking-services-ltd

Simon Renshaw-Smith described the court ruling as ".....an embarrassment to the judicial system" and he made some pretty rude remarks about the judge too, describing her as "not fit to serve the civil courts".

A spokesperson from Excel said:

Q1) Why has Excel decided not to change the signs in the Peel Centre Car Park, despite the ruling in the Cutts case?

A1) The said court case is one isolated incident that fell in Cutts' favour. We strongly believe that Deputy District Judge's decision was a grave error of judgement.

beamerguy

OH YES, in case the courts have a memory lapse a must to be highlighted to a judge, they don't like their own being degraded

Simon Renshaw-Smith described the court ruling as ".....an embarrassment to the judicial system" and he made some pretty rude remarks about the judge too, describing her as "not fit to serve the civil courts".

The_Deep

It does not matter who saw what, it is now almost five years old since the event. They have sent you signs taken three years after the event. BW are probably trying to overcharge you, (how much do they want), and they are renowned for upsetting judges.

You would appear to have the better hand. Use it to cost the PPC lots of money.

System

This will all come down to the pics of the car on the day. If they want to press a claim in court, BW will have to produce them.

To save all the parties hassle, then write to BW and ask for copies of the pics of the car they will rely on at court.

If they send them, then you can decide. If they don't, then you can continue to ask to show a court a level of unreasonableness on BW's part.

Saves all the messing around with technical arguments. The valid ticket was either visible or it wasn't.