Combined Parking Solutions Notification of Legal Proceedings

Yorkie1804

Apologies if this is covered elsewhere in the wealth of information available, but I have spent several hours researching this. I have discovered that CPS do take a few people to court each year but not many. Brief outline of events so far, and will of course provide more detail if advised accordingly by reputable people. (having also read how certain people will pose under different names and give fake advice!)
So, PCN issued in 2015,
NTK received and replied to, requesting an appeal, nothing heard (i did post a thread at the time but it is now closed and not sure if they can be re-opened?)
Several letters from Debt Recovery Plus with the usual harassment to pay ever increasing costs or a final offer
I now have a letter from CPS headed Notification Of Legal Proceedings (in suitably large scary red bold font!) giving me a choice of paying £100 within 14 days or allow the matter to proceed to court and complete the enclosed Pre Action Protocol documents
I intend to dispute this but want to know if I should treat this as a LBC, or would this only come from a Solicitor? If I do respond to this, is this the time to ask for further details and information from CPS or do I just wait for the solicitor's letter and then respond
Thanks in advance for any guidance, and apologies again if this thread was not necessary

Castle

Your previous thread I presume:-
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5342559

A LBC can come from either the parking company or their solicitors; the new pre action protocol states 30 days is the minimum period to reply, not 14.

Yorkie1804

Thanks for the quick reply, and yes that was mine
From the wording and enclosures I assumed it was an LBC and will reply accordingly, after a bit more research on here of course

Umkomaas

Yorkie1804 wrote: »

Thanks for the quick reply, and yes that was mine
From the wording and enclosures I assumed it was an LBC and will reply accordingly, after a bit more research on here of course

You can treat it as one, but check that it fully complies with the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (PaP). If it doesn't, you write back and require from them everything which you are entitled to receive. Don't let them get away with anything.

The NEWBIES FAQ sticky, post #2 of this sub-forum will guide you through the entire court process, from LBC right up to the court hearing - use this as your 'go to' for instant answers to most questions you're likely to have.

EDIT TO ADD

Forgot to post the link to the PaP - here it is:

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/pdf/protocols/pre-action-protocol-for-debt-claims.pdf

Yorkie1804

Thanks again for the replies so far. I have spent time looking at the advice on responding to the LBC and taking the PaP into account. Is it worth posting my letter on here for you to have a look at or just get it in the post? Couple of hopefully quick queries which I am sure someone can clarify
1. Should the LBC be from a named individual and signed, or can it just be from a company
2. Should I be sending them photographs to back up my defence, or wait for them to request this
3. I have seen some advice to send the letter back in the normal post rather than recorded or registered? But I was thinking that if I send it recorded and it is refused, this could go against them should the matter proceed further?

nosferatu1001

1) Company is of coruse fine. Its just a letter
2) They wont request, theyll (if the put a claim in) just say you didnt provide any evidence to support it. So you can include photos if you are SURE they help you
3) ALWAYS send first class, with FREE certificate of posting from the PO counter. If they refuse it then it is PROVEN to not have been served.

Yorkie1804

Thanks for the clarifications
I have photos that I took myself to show that the space was not clearly marked and there are no signs at the entrances to the car park. I have also taken some Google Street view shots which show over time there are still no signs on the entrance, and also that the signage in the car park and individual spaces has been changed (almost as if they acted on the information in my original appeal, even though they seem to have ignored my letter..)
I guess there would be 2 potential benefits from sending the photos then, firstly it complies with the PaP and secondly might persuade them to drop the matter

nosferatu1001

It might do, they might not

Howveer if you point out that they have since changed the signs and repainted the car park, firstly your photos might be th eonly photos of the as-is situaiton left, and secondly it shows they at least must implicitly have thought the lines and markings were inadequat e- on balance of probabilities.

So state that you will rley on this in court, to show there was no possible cause of action as there was no clear obligation on the driver at the time. To continue to a claim will be vexatious as they have no realistic prospect of success, AND they have been made aware of it. The reaosnable response would be for them to drop any pretence.

Yorkie1804

Great stuff, thanks. Have spent several hours editing my response, but it's nice to have another couple of well worded gems to throw in there!

System

CPS tend to rely on CCTV images that their clients supply. Why not ask for a copy of the source of their pics of the car allegedly being in breach of their supposed contract. You are entitled to it.

That should nail the issue of signs if the CCTV pans around.

The_Deep

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, and another company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each year). They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

Hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned.

The problem has become so rampant that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Watch the video of the Second Reading in the HofC recently.

http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind they will be out of business by Christmas.