SCS Law letter received regarding outstanding fines. Please help!

Loadsofchildren123

My partner acted as a postbox for his elderly father in my Millennium thread PCN. We put his address on the AoS and wrote to them saying that he was acting on his father's behalf and please address all correspondence to him and Gladstones had no issue with that.

Doodakoff

And we're back - only took them 3 months this time to reply!

I've received another "updated" Letter of Claim - ignoring a lot of my requests, including the request for an address change which I'm not happy about. It is slightly different than the last letters received and they have finally provided the total amount for all the fines.





Not much difference but thought I would show changes for context. Note that they have now given me 30 days to reply - which makes me think this letter tennis may be coming to an end quite soon!

They have also included an Annex 1 Information Sheet and a "Reply Form" which I think is due to the changes and inclusions of the PAP. I'm at work at the moment and will read over PAP to ensure they have complied with it fully.

The Annex 1 Info sheet displays info in relation to advice and the Reply Form allows me to tick box's disputing the debt, stating how I will pay, stating whether I am going to get debt advice, documents I intend to send and a standard financial statement they are requesting me to complete.

I am yet to go through all of the fines they have provided this time as they are again out of order and it takes some time! I doubt they are all there.

I aim to keep the letter tennis going so I am trying to work out what I can add in my letter. I'm also guessing I need to complete the requested "Reply Form" and that this cannot be ignored. I have 30 days to complete it. (Well I did have, I lost a week as it apparently took a week to arrive going by the date they put at the top of their letter)

Again, myself and my partner thank you for all of your help

Quentin

The 30 days to reply is statutory when a creditor sends you a LBCCA.


Robust response is the advice in the newbies faq thread (#2) after receiving one of these, and expect a court claim to follow

[Deleted User]

It hasn't come to this yet, but if you have nominated a new address for service (you MUST reside or conduct business there to meet the CPR requirements) do bear in mind that a claim form sent elsewhere (i.e. to the old address) is NOT served. (See CPR 6.8)

Doodakoff

Thank you both.

Johnersh, that's really helpful to know. I nominated a different address in my previous reply to them as it is causing my partner significant distress. They ignored my request and chose to continue sending it to the old address.

That should be worth mentioning in my next reply!

Coupon-mad

Yes and you can add that's a failure under the DPA to keep correct, up to date records. Breaches the data protection principles not to properly and fairly process and store correct data and update it in a timely fashion. ICO complaint could be threatened.

Doodakoff

Thank you all for your replies. I've seen your edit Johnersh and the we do live at the nominated address. My only concern is that our home is an apartment and we don't have a letter box. We have a small physical letter box on the ground floor and if they decide to send another ridiculously sized package, it wont fit in. I'm hoping this won't be the case as I believe they have now provided all of the tickets. There are still some outstanding documents that I requested, which I have documented in the below letter I have spent the last few days completing.

And thank you Coupon-Mad, I have included your advice in my reply also



Dear Sirs,

Re: Britannia Parking Group Ltd

I write further to your letter dated **** received ****.

The contents of your letter are noted. Your previous claim that you have undertaken extensive investigations regarding this matter is still also noted. I am however left even more confused from your correspondence.

Your most recent letter states that it includes the totality of parking charge notices, with dates supplied for each one. In previous letters received, you have claimed that I owed fines to your client for the following dates.
****, ****, ****, ****, ****, ****, ****, ****, ****, ****, ****, ****, ****, ****

I note that these fines are no longer included on the totality, and have in fact, completely vanished from your provided totality. I request the reason as to why, considering you have pursued this so vigorously and that previous letters have harassed me to such an extent that I have been left in a highly distressed state, that these fines are suddenly absent.

I also note that you have provided no explanation what so ever in relation to the previous duplicated fines that you claim I owe to your client. I note that these too have simply vanished, again, without explanation and leaving me more confused.

I also still require, as per my previous request and as per paragraph 3.1 of the Pre-Action Protocol.

iii. A copy of any document your client asserts sets out the terms of the alleged contract between it and a driver (this may be the same as iv below);

iv. You have still not provided a copy of signs on display, with times and dates these were taken, or a dated plan of there position in the car park as they were displayed. Your letter dated **** stated they these were included, however, they were not. I therefore still require a copy of the signs on display and a dated plan of where in the car park they were displayed on those dates;

v. You have still not provided a map of boundaries within the site. Again, you stated in your previous letter that this was included, however it was not. I therefore require a map showing the boundary within the site, purportedly operated by Britannia Parking Group Ltd., as opposed to the other parking operators also operating at this location.

As before, these are core documents, central to your client’s claim. As such, they are documents which are required to have been produced at an early stage (regardless of whether or not I asked for them) in this pre-action phase, pursuant to paragraph 6 of the Practice Direction – Pre-Action Conduct and the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims, in particular paragraph 3. I am still requesting these documents because I clearly require them in order to be able to prepare a proper defence to any Claim and/or a meaningful POPLA appeal, as is my entitlement. The Civil Procedure Rules clearly anticipate an early exchange of information, as per paragraph 3 of the Pre-Action Protocol and as per paragraph 3 and 6 of the Practice Direction – Pre-Action Conduct, Rule 16 and Practice Direction 16 – any failure to produce the information I have asked for will be nothing other than a deliberate attempt to frustrate my ability to defend the claim and a failure to comply with pre-action obligations.

I also wish to request, once again, that the tickets I have requested not be sporadically placed, in no order, within a package. I have yet again had to waste hours of my time going through the documents you have provided which have been placed completely out of order. You are also still providing me the same tickets over and over. I currently have 4x copies of tickets that I have not requested. Please stop sending me duplicates of tickets, making the parcel I receive from you incredibly oversized and full of replicated and already received documents.

Due to the fact that there are still documents missing, others completely vanished and again the duplication of tickets, I can only assume that the reason for this was for scare tactics and to ensure hours were lost on my part organising said documents and identifying what is missing. I would also like add that this misleading correspondence, the omission of others and lack of explanations is still adding significant distress, both to myself, and my family.

I also to note your complete disregard for my request of nominated address for service. In my previous letter, I clearly stated that I wish to nominate a different address to which all further correspondence should be sent. You chose to ignore this request. I can only assume this was in the hope I didn’t receive your letter and missed your allocated time slot for a reply.

I further state that my nominated address for service is ****, to which all further correspondence should be sent. It is a failure under the Data Protection Act to ensure that correct and up to date records are maintained. Failure to do so breaches the data protection principles in which not to properly and fairly process and store correct data and to also ensure it is updated in a timely fashion. Should this request be further ignored, I put you on notice that an ICO complaint will be pursued.

I expect a substantive response with the documents and POPLA code (or confirmation of cancellation of all PCNs) within 14 days of this letter. I note that it has taken you over 5 months to respond to my previous letter.

Yours faithfully,



Is it worth mentioning the vanishing of the tickets that I mentioned in my letter? They haven't provided any explanation, just chose not to include them. I'm not sure whether it's worth just ignoring that because if they do add them on, the fine goes up!

I'm aiming on sending this next week to meet their 30 day deadline. There's not much more content I can think of adding as I believe this may be coming to an end with the potential impending court letter.

Again, any read through and recommendations I greatly appreciate! This place is like a comfort blanket as all of this has been so incredibly stressful! - I've learnt a lot though so it's not all bad

I thank each and everyone of you again.

Coupon-mad

Dear Sirs,

Re: Britannia Parking Group Ltd

I write further to your letter dated **** received ****. I note that it has taken you over 5 months to respond to my previous letter.

The contents of your letter are noted, along with your previous claim that you have undertaken extensive investigations regarding this matter. Given that the objectionable and aggressive correspondence comes from a notorious 'robo-claim' firm of solicitors like SCS, it is clear to me that this is a disingenuous attempt at paying lip service to the Pre-Action Protocol. You have literally thrown together a pile of documents, leaving me even more confused. No doubt that was your intention, along with an aim to intimidate consumers into believing they are liable for 'fines' and 'debts' that are utterly without merit.

It will not have escaped your attention that firms like SCS were singled out in the Parliamentary debate on Friday about the despicable private parking 'industry'. MP Stephen Doughty spoke compellingly and with vitriol about the firms that solicitors like SCS are propping up and giving a veil of legitimacy:

''I also want to highlight the firms of solicitors that work with those companies. We might refer to such firms as 'roboclaims' firms, and they often have a close and cosy relationship with the parking companies.

Fundamentally, this comes down to common sense, justice and reasonableness. When things end up in court, it is an absurd situation. Roboclaims companies, which are making a massive mint off this industry, can issue a summons for just £30, and yet a defendant can sometimes have to pay as much as eight times that to defend the case, as well as having to deal with the time, emotion and everything that comes with that process.

I wholeheartedly support the Bill proposed by the right hon. Member for East Yorkshire and very much hope it gets Royal Assent. We need to crack down on these rogue companies. They are an absolute disgrace to this country.''


An absolute disgrace that not a single MP in the House defended in any way at all. I fully intend to bring your conduct, your client's conduct and the will of Parliament to end this sort of harassment, to the attention of the Judge, should your client proceed.

Your most recent letter states that it includes the totality of parking charge notices, with dates supplied for each one. In previous letters received, you have claimed that I [STRIKE]owed fines[/STRIKE] am liable for alleged 'charges' to your client for the following dates.
****, ****, ****, ****, ****, ****, ****, ****, ****, ****, ****, ****, ****, ****

I note that these fines are no longer included on the totality, and have in fact, completely vanished. [STRIKE]from your provided totality[/STRIKE]. I request the reason as to why, considering you have pursued this so vigorously and that previous letters have harassed me to such an extent that I have been left in a highly distressed state. [STRIKE]that these fines are suddenly absent.[/STRIKE] Should you fail to reply on this point, I will make the reasonable assumption that these baseless charges have been cancelled.

I also note that you have provided no explanation whatsoever [STRIKE]what so ever[/STRIKE] in relation to the previous duplicated fines that you claim I owe to your client. I note that these too have simply vanished, again, without explanation and leaving me more confused.

I also still require, as per my previous request and as per paragraph 3.1 of the Pre-Action Protocol:

iii. A copy of any document your client asserts sets out the terms of the alleged contract between it and a driver (this may be the same as iv below);

iv. You have still not provided a copy of signs on display, with times and dates these were taken, or a dated plan of there position in the car park as they were displayed. Your letter dated **** stated they these were included, however, they were not. I therefore still require a copy of the signs on display and a dated plan of where in the car park they were displayed on those dates;

v. You have still not provided a map of boundaries within the site. Again, you stated in your previous letter that this was included, however it was not. I therefore require a map showing the boundary within the site, purportedly operated by Britannia Parking Group Ltd., as opposed to the other parking operators also operating at this location.

As before, these are core documents, central to your client's claim. As such, they are documents which are required to have been produced at an early stage (regardless of whether or not I asked for them) in this pre-action phase, pursuant to paragraph 6 of the Practice Direction: Pre-Action Conduct and the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims, in particular paragraph 3. I am still requesting these documents because I clearly require them in order to be able to prepare a proper defence to any Claim and/or a meaningful POPLA appeal, as is my entitlement. The Civil Procedure Rules clearly anticipate an early exchange of information, as per paragraph 3 of the Pre-Action Protocol and as per paragraph 3 and 6 of the Practice Direction: Pre-Action Conduct, Rule 16 and Practice Direction 16.

Any failure to produce the information I have asked for will be nothing other than a deliberate attempt to frustrate my ability to defend the claim and a failure to comply with pre-action obligations.

I also wish to request, once again, that the tickets I have requested not be [STRIKE]sporadically placed[/STRIKE] randomly thrown together, in no order, within a package. I have yet again had to waste hours of my time going through the documents you have provided which have been placed completely out of order. You are also still providing me the same tickets over and over. I currently have 4x copies of tickets that I have not requested. Please stop sending me duplicates of tickets, making the parcel I receive from you incredibly oversized and full of replicated and already received documents.

Due to the fact that there are still documents missing, others completely vanished and again the duplication of tickets, I can only assume that the reason for this was for scare tactics and to ensure hours were lost on my part organising said documents and identifying what is missing. I would also like add that this misleading correspondence, the omission of others and lack of explanations is still adding significant distress, both to myself, and my family.

I also to note your complete disregard for my request of nominated address for service. In my previous letter, I clearly stated that I wish to nominate a different address to which all further correspondence should be sent. You chose to ignore this request. I can only assume this was in the hope I [STRIKE]didn't[/STRIKE] would not receive your letter and missed your allocated time slot for a reply.

I further state that my nominated address for service is:

****
******
******

to which all further correspondence [STRIKE]should[/STRIKE] must be sent.

It is a failure of your obligations under the Data Protection Act, not to ensure that correct and up to date records are maintained. Failure to do so breaches the data protection principles in which not to properly and fairly process and store correct data and to also ensure it is updated in a timely fashion.

Should this request be further ignored, I put you on notice that an ICO complaint will be pursued.

You should also note that I have sent a copy of this letter to my MP and intend to appraise him of your harassment and distress you are causing.

I expect a substantive response with the documents and POPLA code (or confirmation of cancellation of all PCNs) within 14 days of this letter. [STRIKE]I note that it has taken you over 5 months to respond to my previous letter.[/STRIKE]

Yours faithfully,

KeithP

It is a failure under the Data Protection Act to ensure that correct and up to date records are maintained.

No it isn't.

Perhaps replace with something like:

It is a failure of your obligations under the Data Protection Act not to ensure that correct and up to date records are maintained.

Also, even after CM's excellent improvements, there remains at least one instance of the word 'fines'.

Coupon-mad

Good point, I ran out of steam!