BW Legal threat post missing PCN letters from IPC

tow2316

Hi,

I have read the newbies thread and advice but struggling to formulate my exact response.

My partner (the keeper) has received a PCN from VCS (vehicle control services IPC member) after a driver parked outside of a bay in a full car park (not blocking any entrances/exits or on any yellow hashed lines).

We missed the 2 letters from the VCS as we were in Ireland as my partners father passed away (we were away for 2 months). Upon our return we (soon after) received a letter from BW Legal who have taken over recovering the 'balance due'.

I have seen this thread that I can use to respond (/showthread.php?t=5673397), is this appropriate course of action or have I missed something? (confused!) Also should I email BW Legal or VCS?

Sorry if this is basic level stuff but I want to get this right and don't want to stress my partner anymore as this has been a tough couple of months.

Thanks in advance

Coupon-mad

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5673397

Yes you can edit and adapt that sort of thing, with nothing about the Equality Act obviously, and nothing specific to CEL/Wright Hassall (change to VCS/BW Legal).

I would say your partner replies as registered keeper, with some of what's in that example you read, but also saying you've been away in Ireland due to a bereavement, since July, have no idea what this is about and consider it unwarranted harassment. Ask them to furnish you with a copy of the sign, all photos taken and to explain whether they contend that the keeper is liable under the POFA or whether the client is assuming the keeper was driving, as they can't proceed without open communication and explaining the cause of action, and basis of liability sought.

The idea is to stop them from proceeding before 1st October, tie BW Legal up before the rules change on pre-action conduct (as stated on loads of threads recently).

tow2316

Thank you!

Will formulate a response and email it tonight,

Thanks for your help. Much appreciated.

Thanks

tow2316

Hi,

I took your advice and BW legal backed off, citing they would 'talk to their client'.

However, we received this week a letter asking for proof that my partner was out of the country with her father very ill/passing away at the time of the ticket. I have a few questions, if you could help?

1) is this a legal request to make?
2) we have the email bookings that proove she (the registered keeper) was out of the country, should we just send them those?
3) Is this a trick to narrow down who could have been the driver? (I specifically stated in the rebuttal email that we would not be naming the driver)
4) what should I do? (reply with evidence, reply without evidence or ignore)?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

thanks,

Tom

Ryandavis1959

Why don’t you just name the driver? If you wasn’t driving that car then why should you have to suffer all of this stress? Just tell them who was driving and then it’s their problem!

Naming the driver now is the clear money saving option. I reckon any legal advisor would agree.

beamerguy

tow2316 wrote: »

Hi,

I took your advice and BW legal backed off, citing they would 'talk to their client'.

However, we received this week a letter asking for proof that my partner was out of the country with her father very ill/passing away at the time of the ticket. I have a few questions, if you could help?

1) is this a legal request to make?
2) we have the email bookings that proove she (the registered keeper) was out of the country, should we just send them those?
3) Is this a trick to narrow down who could have been the driver? (I specifically stated in the rebuttal email that we would not be naming the driver)
4) what should I do? (reply with evidence, reply without evidence or ignore)?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

thanks,

Tom

As far as the legalities go, it would only be a court and
a real judge who would decide. Do remember that the
great parking scam is unregulated. As such why would
you provide any data to company just because they
have Legal in their name.

You can confirm to them only what you have provided
already.
If they are stupid enough to continue then the next
stage will be a claim where they must provide full
information as per the new procedures.
In return, you can then provide your statement which
the court will see as well.
Will they continue then ????

All BWLegal can do is ..
1: Drop it
2: Issue court proceedings against the keeper
as they don't know who was driving, but the whereabouts
of the keeper at the time is already known.

Play the game, you have more evidence than they do.
Naming the driver would be very foolish

Umkomaas

If you have proof, send a copy to them and, given that you have acquiesced to their request and provided such proof, require them to cancel the parking charge. I’d copy their request and your response and evidence to the DVLA. Mark your response to them ‘cc Mr David Dunford, DVLA, Swansea’.

david.dunford@dvla.gsi.gov.uk

If they don’t know who the driver was, then, particularly as the keeper has evidence that it wasn’t them, you do not provide details of the driver. You are neither legally nor morally obliged to do so.

Please ignore the misguided advice in post #5!

tow2316

Thanks @umkomass and @beamerguy. This has been a great help and I have used your advice to formulate a response.

I hope they drop it this time. Will post here if anything changes. But thanks again for your great help.

beamerguy

tow2316 wrote: »

Thanks @umkomass and @beamerguy. This has been a great help and I have used your advice to formulate a response.

I hope they drop it this time. Will post here if anything changes. But thanks again for your great help.

So let us know, BWLegal are simply a joke

tow2316

Hi all,
Bw legal replied today,

They state "it is irrelevant that you were out of the country" and go on to mention

Under section 4 of the protection of freedoms act they are entitled to pursue you as the registered keeper as I won't provide details of the driver.

They want to provide details of the driver otherwise they will pursue the owner for the balance due as the registered keeper.

This doesn't seem in line with the legal process. Can anyone advise?

They also claimed twice since my last post that I hadn't replied despite having done so, changed the reference number and wrote letters ignoring my responses intimidating me to pay.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks.

Coupon-mad

Can anyone advise?

They would say that, wouldn't they? Not sure you need advice on their lies, it's obvious why they mislead.

Reply with a screenshot of VCS' NTK words about the 'after 28 days...registered keeper' (low down on page one) which I am guessing was the usual 'we will pursue the rk on the ASSUMPTION they were the driver' (am I right?).

And then quote the real words from Scheudle 4 para 9(2)(f) and ask BW Legal to FORMALLY confirm that their legal position is going to be, in court, that the NTK is POFA compliant, and that VCS WILL be 'relying on the POFA'. And if in the alternative, VCS will not be relying upon the POFA, what exactly will they be relying on as their excuse to harass you, as a registered keeper who was not driving, and has proved they were out of the country?*



*if you haven't proved it, prove it NOW - flight tickets or a signed witness statement from family.