PCN Letters from BWLegal and Napier Parking

ALLSOP

Background Info
I had received a £90 PCN from Napier Parking 2 years ago on 11/03/2016 for my previous car. Reason for issue: parking or waiting on roadway or on verge/footpath.

I ignored all the letters, including last debt collector letter on 05/12/2016. Then 2 years later on 19/01/2018 I get this letter from BW Legal, their legal team. They are demanding the £90 PCN and £60 legal cost, a total of £150. I have made a formal request for all the information / documents as required by the pre-action protocol for debt claims; I have sent this letter below:

Sir/Madam,

I am in receipt of your Letter Before Claim of 19th January 2018. Your letter contains insufficient detail of the claim and fails to provide copies of evidence your client places reliance upon.

Your client must know that on 01 October 2017 a new protocol is applicable to debt claims. Since proceedings have not yet been issued, the new protocol clearly applies and must be complied with.

Your letter lacks specificity and breaches both the requirements of the previously applicable Practice Direction - Pre-Action Conduct (paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c)) and the new Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (paragraphs 3.1(a)-(d), 5.1 and 5.2). Please treat this letter as a formal request for all of the documents / information that the protocol now requires your client to provide. Your client must not issue proceedings without complying with that protocol. I reserve the right to draw any failure to comply to the attention of the court, and to ask the court to stay the claim and order your client to comply, and when costs come to be considered.

As solicitors you must surely be familiar with the requirements of both the Practice Direction applicable pre-1 October 2017 and the Protocol which applies thereafter (and your client, as a serial litigator of small claims, should likewise be aware of them). As you (and your client) must know, the Practice Direction and Protocol bind all potential litigants, whatever the size or type of the claim. Its express purpose is to assist parties in understanding the claim and their respective positions in relation to it, to enable parties to take stock of their positions and to negotiate a settlement, or at least narrow the issues, without incurring the costs of court proceedings or using up valuable court time. It is astounding that a firm of Solicitors are sending a consumer a vague and un-evidenced 'Letter Before Claim'; in complete ignorance of the pre-existing Practice Direction and the new Protocol.

Nobody, including your client, is immune from the requirements and obligations of the Practice Direction and now the Protocol. I require your client to comply with its obligations by sending me the following information/documents:

1. An explanation of the cause of action;
2. Whether they are pursuing me as driver or keeper;
3. Whether they are relying on the provisions of Schedule 4 of POFA 2012;
4. What the details of the claim are; where it is claimed the vehicle was parked, for how long, how the monies being claimed arose and have been calculated;
5. Is the claim for a contractual breach? If so, what is the date of the agreement? The names of the parties to it and provide to me a copy of that contract;
6. Is the claim for trespass? If so, provide details;
7. Provide me a copy of the contract with the landowner under which they assert authority to bring the claim, as required by the IPC code of practice section B, clause 1.1 "establishing yourself as the creditor";
8. A plan showing where any signs were displayed;
9. Details of the signs displayed (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed);
10. Provide details of the original charge, and detail any interest and administrative or other charges added;
11. Provide a copy of the Information Sheet and Reply Form;

If your client does not provide me with this information then I put you on notice that I will be relying on the cases of Webb Resolutions Ltd v Waller Needham & Green [2012] EWHC 3529 (Ch), Daejan Investments Limited v The Park West Club Limited (Part 20) - Buxton Associates [2003] EWHC 2872, Charles Church Developments Ltd v Stent Foundations Limited & Peter Dann Limited [2007] EWHC 855 in asking the court to impose sanctions on your client and to order a stay of the proceedings, pursuant to paragraphs 13,15(b) and (c) and 16 of the Practice Direction, as referred to in paragraph 7.2 of the Protocol.

Until your client has complied with its obligations and provided this information, I am unable to respond properly to the alleged claim and to consider my position in relation to it, and it is entirely premature (and a waste of costs and court time) for your client to issue proceedings. Should your client do so, then I will seek an immediate stay pursuant to paragraph 15(b) of the Practice Direction and an order that this information is provided.

Yours faithfully

I have received a reply letter from BW Legal on 19/02/2018. They have failed to provide me with all the information / documents I requested, as they have just attached the original PCN with the date and time of incident, reason for issue, and photographic evidence of car and sign.

I Sent the Following Email Reply:

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am in receipt of your letter dated 19 February 2018, in response to my formal request letter. Your client has failed to provide me with all the information / documents requested in my previous letter.

I have attached a copy of my formal request letter. Your client must comply with the pre-existing Practice Direction and the new Protocol for debt claims.

Until your client has complied with its obligations and provided me with all the information requested in my letter, I am unable to respond properly to the alleged claim, I reserve the right to draw any failure to comply to the attention of the court, and to ask the court to stay the claim and order your client to comply.

Yours faithfully,

I have received another reply letter from BWLegal on 27/03/2018. They have attached copies of PCN letters, large pictures of the car and parking sign, and example of county court claim they won. Also more threats of legal action, here is Quote from Napier parking Final Reminder (Copy of letter sent June 2016).

Should you force us to go to court, we give notice of our intention to seek our full legal costs against you under Civil Procedure Rules 27.14(2)(g) on the basis that you have wasted our time and that you do not have, and never advanced any legitimate defence. In appropriate circumstances, the rule permits a Judge to award;

'...such further costs as the court may assess by the summary procedure and order to be paid be a party who has behaved unreasonably.'

If we obtain a County Court Judgement (CCJ) against you, this could have a negative effect on your credit record for a period of 6 years. We will also take steps to enforce the County Court Judgement against you should you fail to pay.

As you can see, I have sent them a Letter and Email request for ALL the information detailed above. They have again failed to provide the following information from above list:

Is the claim for a contractual breach? If so, what is the date of the agreement? The names of the parties to it and provide to me a copy of that contract;

Provide me a copy of the contract with the landowner under which they assert authority to bring the claim, as required by the IPC code of practice section B, clause 1.1 "establishing yourself as the creditor";

I cant keep repeating myself, so I will wait if they make small claim...

QUESTIONS:

• What would you do given this situation?

• If they make Small Claim, what are my chances of winning?

• What is a good defence against Court Claim?

• Does CCJ have negative effect on credit rating?

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Regards,
ALLSOP