BW Legal court threat for a 6 years old Parking ticket

Maxcens

Hi,

I have been advised by BMPA that:

"Since it is so long ago, these are best ignored. They send these letters out periodically to rattle you with the aim of either a) paying of b) you helping them by giving information they did not have in the first place. So ignoring is best.

You have rightly identified that there is a limitation so writing to them is not a good idea as you do not want to reset the 6 years."

I am now confused an very reluctant to do anything. I mean Excel and their representatives had 6 years to take to court, why would they do it now?

Marktheshark

Sit and await court papers, counter claim for nuisance (law of tort Unreasonableness behavior) and misrepresentation of the data.
Make some money out of them

Lamilad

BMPA are a fantastic organisation and their advice is to be respected. You certainly could ignore if you want it just depends if you want to fire them a few warning shots or not.

Writing to them will not reset the clock. As hoohoo says it may be 6 years from when the invoice became overdue which, in my mind, would be 28 days after the invoice date.

Nothing wrong with the BMPA advice but I, personally, would write to them as per hoohoo's comment asking for more info - copy of PCN, photos etc in order to help you prepare a full response to their letter.

This will surely push them over the deadline - then you can hit them with the 'statute barred'/ section 10 notice

Fruitcake

I think the comment about resetting the clock was referring to revealing the driver's identity during the grey period.

If you intend to make money from these shysters I would suggest firing a shot across their bows now, but obviously making sure you only do it as keeper.
You may then be able to drag this out into the black (or is it white) area when there can be no reasonable doubt that it is statute barred.

Coupon-mad

I don't agree that contact can reset the 6 years, AFAIK that only applies under the CCA.

Loadsofchildren123

Just thinking more about this timing issue.


There isn't a clear latest payment date, like there is on an invoice (eg payable within x days, usually either 14 or 28). All the NtD will say is "you owe us £100, if you pay us within 14 days we will accept £60, if you haven't paid after 28 days we'll contract a hitman to assassinate chase the keeper".
So there is no actual payment date.


However, that may not stop a PPC arguing the point, and I think that there are different arguments depending on whether they are pursuing you as driver or keeper as to when the cause of action accrues, from which you count on 6 years:
1. for the driver: the last date given to the driver to pay up before they chase the keeper (28 days after the NtD)
2. for the keeper: the last date given to the keeper on the NtK to pay up before they take formal action (not sure if there is a standard period, the NtK in my case said to pay up 28 days from the date of the NtK)


But it's obviously sensible to work out the latest arguable date and make sure you get beyond that. Don't point out the limitation problem until then.

Loadsofchildren123

I actually wouldn't write to them at all until the last possible limitation date has passed.


I am not going to spend hours researching it (actually I probably will now knowing my obsession with PPCs), but I do remember a recent case where there was negotiation going on and the Claimant forgot to issue proceedings. The court held that because negotiations had started before limitation ended it was some sort of exception.

System

I actually wouldn't write to them at all until the last possible limitation date has passed.

+1

Working out that date is the difficult bit which is why they are trying it on.

https://www.nationaldebtline.org/EW/factsheets/Pages/time-limits-for-recovering-debts/statute-barred-debt.aspx

Bare in mind that BW Legal are benefiting from litigation funding. They have funding from 3rd parties to hoover up any "debt" not just PPC debt and then send out claims whether they are valid or not. It's a numbers game so going macho on them is not a good idea as they have firepower/finance that most do not have.

Loadsofchildren123

OK, it didn't take me hours, I've found an answer. The court requires exceptional circumstances to extend a limitation period. Examples of this would be where, eg, the parties had been engaged in pre-action correspondence in an attempt to settle, there were reasons for the delay which were outside the claimant’s control, or the claimant could not have known about the claim until close to the end of the limitation period.
A recent authority is the case of The Khan Partnership LLP v Infinity Distribution Ltd [2016] EWHC 1390 where the court gave some guidance. Notably, in that case the Defendant was guilty of a bit of skulduggery in trying to make sure that they defeated the limitation period. And the Claimant had done everything by the book - it had drafted a claim which it had sent to the Defendant so the latter was on full notice of the claim and of the limitation problem.


Now let's compare to this case. It's not an important commercial dispute involving hundreds of thousands of £££s. It is a £100 parking charge. The Claimant and Defendant have not been negotiating. The Claimant has out of the blue, almost 6 years after the event, started chasing for a small amount of money. The Defendant has done nothing to lead the Claimant down the garden path.


I couldn't see the court entertaining an application to extend limitation in this case - there are no exceptional circumstances. But I think it's important that the OP should NOT ask for photos etc for the sake of it, I think he's better ignoring for as long as he can (asking for things could be interpreted as a deliberate delaying tactic).

The_Deep

They have funding from 3rd parties to hoover up any "debt" not just PPC debt


Could you explain this please. Who would give money to a low rent firm such as this to pursue dodgy claims?