Old Fine Napier Parking BW Legal

Robotbobblehead

Hi Everyone,

I was wondering if anyone could help me?

I have received a letter from BW Legal on behalf of Napier car parking about a PCN from 3 years ago. I ignored the previous letters from Napier when I was first issued the PCN as I thought this was the correct advice.

This is the first I’ve heard from then in 2 1/2 years.

Any help/advice you could offer would be greatly appreciated.

Many thanks.

P.S. I can't post links as I've just signed up
but here are the letters...

imgur(dot)com/g4xeuyU
imgur(dot)com/uO8Xw1l

Redx

treat it as an LBC and reply, otherwise its likely an MCOL will come your way from Northampton (the PPC have 6 years to issue an MCOL, so 2.5 years is less than half)

read the NEWBIES sticky thread , and the LBCCC sticky thread inside the crabman sticky thread

the advice to IGNORE a PPC has not been correct for 4 years , due to POFA2012 being implemented 4.5 years ago

Coupon-mad

Just so you are aware, you can't expect time 'to get change' when parking in any paid-for bay. You are expected to obtain/carry change, and even Council on street rules/regs would not give you time to get change either. Car park numbskull firms wait for no man before issuing a PCN, so no-one is safe from their clutches, except non-drivers.

The car will have been there for more than 2 minutes. Napier have a little trick that they record the observation as a specific number of short minutes. For one thing, if a person states on a forum the exact minutes on the ticket, Napier (who read this forum and the Parking Prankster's Blog) will be able to identify the case. But in total, Napier will actually have observed for longer.

So beware what you say on here about who was driving (DO NOT TELL US). But BW Legal are nothing to fear, they do 'robo-claims' and check nothing at all. You can read about their failures on any Excel defence thread as they mainly 'act' for Excel Parking.

BW Legal are considered useless at claims and can be beaten.

Hope you have by now read 'NEWBIES PLEASE READ THESE FAQS FIRST' which is at the top of the forum to help people. Post #2 covers the Letter before Claim and the subsequent defence. This is nothing to worry about, no CCJ happens as long as you don't ignore an actual court claim. We help people win 99% of them (yes, that high!).

Even if you lost, you'd just be told to pay the £70 or £80 or whatever, plus just £50 in fees if BW Legal/Napier got lucky and managed to prevail. Almost unheard of and no risk to worry about as long as you now read the forum and respond as registered keeper (NOT DRIVER).

Robotbobblehead

Thank you very much Redx and Coupon-mad for the swift replies and sending me in the right direction.

So as I understand it, I should now reply and acknowledge receipt of the LBCCC but also point out areas in which they have not complied with the practice direction?

Their letter also states

"Should we successfully obtain a County Court Judgement ("CCJ"), this may have a detrimental effect on your future credit worthiness and employability. Our client also reserves the right to commence enforcement proceedings against you for the recovery of the Balance Due."

I remember reading elsewhere that this scare tactic is incorrect but I can not find the source now.

Thanks again.

Castle

Have a read of this thread where payment was made on exit; motorist won in court:-
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5639530

Redx

Robotbobblehead wrote: »

Thank you very much Redx and Coupon-mad for the swift replies and sending me in the right direction.

So as I understand it, I should now reply and acknowledge receipt of the LBCCC but also point out areas in which they have not complied with the practice direction?

Their letter also states

I remember reading elsewhere that this scare tactic is incorrect but I can not find the source now.

Thanks again.

it is correct if you lost in court , and fail to pay the judgment awarded by the judge in a prompt manner (typically within 28 days)

so if you lose in court , pay up , promptly !! - NO CCJ

its what they dont tell you thats of importance here, so they are only correct if there is inaction by yourself at any point

if you win , they are incorrect

if you lose and pay up promptly , they are incorrect

they play fast and lose with the facts

Robotbobblehead

Thanks for all the help and responses.
After reading the stickies I have drafted this response to the letter before claim.

Dear BW Legal,

I acknowledge the letter before claim dated xxxx 2017 (reference xxxx), the contents of which are noted.

The Practice Direction requires us to exchange sufficient information to understand each other’s position. Your letter fails to comply with the Practice Direction and is missing key information necessary for me to respond in full to the alleged contravention.

I will be able to provide a full written response within 14 days of receipt once I receive a letter from you with all the information required under the Practice Direction Annex A Paragraph 2.

Your letter fails to comply with the following parts of the Practice Direction Annex A Paragraph 2:

• 2.1 The claimant’s letter should give concise details about the matter. This should enable the defendant to understand and investigate the issues without needing to request further information. The letter should include –
(3) a clear summary of the facts on which the claim is based; 


(5) if financial loss is claimed, an explanation of how the amount has been calculated

• 2.2 The letter should also –

(1) list the essential documents on which the claimant intends to rely; 


(2) set out the form of ADR (if any) that the claimant considers the most suitable and invite the 
defendant to agree to this; 


• 2.3 Unless the defendant is known to be legally represented the letter should –
(1) refer the defendant to this Practice Direction and in particular draw attention to paragraph 4 
concerning the court’s powers to impose sanctions for failure to comply with the Practice 
Direction; and 





In order for e to respond in full, please provide the following:


1. The original parking charge notice

2. The car parks terms and conditions as referenced in the previous letter

3. The picture of the signs at the location detailing the car parks terms and conditions

4. Evidence of the contravention occurring such as photographic evidence.

5. The operators contract which allows them to operate at the site or confirmation they own the land in question.


Please make sure all documents are timed and dated accurately and can be proved to have been taken at the time of the alleged contravention (with particular reference to time-stamped photographs).


In order to comply with the Practice Direction, please also provide:


1. A clear summary of the facts on which the claim is based.

2. An explanation of how the amount due has been calculated and what it is based upon.

3. A list the essential documents on which you intend to rely

4. A form of ADR that you consider to be the most suitable and invite me to agree


Please respond with all the information requested and the necessary information required to comply with the Practice Direction.

Yours Sincerely,
xxxxx

Any guidance would be much appreciated, thanks!

Coupon-mad

There is no Annex A in the Practice Direction; it changed 2 years ago. So remove those words.

I would also remove this (below) because the last thing you would want, would be them *looking reasonable* by replying and offering the 'non-standard' IAS appeal service - which would mean you would pay £15 only to be bound to lose, and you have to agree to be bound by it, which basically leaves you up a creek with no paddle:

4. A form of ADR that you consider to be the most suitable and invite me to agree

As there is no evidence of the driver, I would ask whether Napier are relying upon the POFA 2012 for 'keeper liability' or not.

Robotbobblehead

Thanks for the heads up Coupon Mad.
I've removed the parts you suggested. Here is my revised draft.

Dear BW Legal,

I acknowledge the letter before claim dated xxx 2017 (xxxxx), the contents of which are noted.

The Practice Direction requires us to exchange sufficient information to understand each other’s position. Your letter fails to comply with the Practice Direction and is missing key information necessary for me to respond in full to the alleged contravention.

I will be able to provide a full written response within 14 days of receipt once I receive a letter from you with all the information required under the Practice Direction Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols.

Your letter fails to comply with the following parts of the Practice Direction Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols.

• The claimant’s letter should give concise details about the matter. This should enable the defendant to understand and investigate the issues without needing to request further information.

The letter should include

o A clear summary of the facts on which the claim is based; 


o If financial loss is claimed, an explanation of how the amount has been calculated; and 


• The letter should also –

o list the essential documents on which the claimant intends to rely; 


o set out the form of ADR (if any) that the claimant considers the most suitable and invite the 
defendant to agree to this; 


• Unless the defendant is known to be legally represented the letter should

o Refer the defendant to this Practice Direction and in particular draw attention to paragraph 4 
concerning the court’s powers to impose sanctions for failure to comply with the Practice 
Direction;



















In order for me to respond in full, please also provide the following:


1. The original parking charge notice

2. The car parks terms and conditions as referenced in the previous letter

3. The picture of the signs at the location detailing the car parks terms and conditions

4. Evidence of the contravention occurring

5. The operator’s contract which allows them to operate at the site, or confirmation they own the land in question.


Please make sure all documents are timed and dated accurately and can be proved to have been taken at the time of the alleged contravention (with particular reference to time-stamped photographs).


In order to comply with the Practice Direction, please also provide:


1. A clear summary of the facts on which the claim is based.

2. An explanation of how the amount due has been calculated and what it is based upon.

3. A list of the essential documents on which you intend to rely.

I would also like to know whether Napier are relying upon POFA 2012 for 'keeper liability'.

Please respond with all the information requested and the necessary information required to comply with the Practice Direction.

Yours Sincerely,
xxxxx

Again any help/advice would be much appreciated!

Thanks

Coupon-mad

Yep it will do, Gladstones might or might not reply, but it's all very reasonable.

I always expect G's to proceed anyway with a robo-claim and I always expect people here to win.

Robotbobblehead

Thanks!