Bw legal letter

Coupon-mad

am i right in thinking at this stage i dont need to mention any details that ill use to challenge them in court?

You should do, if you have a killer point, best to state it early (looks better later at court if you were open & honest in pre-court letters).

Re this, I would just change it a little:

Your letter also provides an income and expenditure form, that you state ''requires completion''.

Shadow0ftheday

thanks so much coupon mad.

my key point is that it was dark when the driver entered the car park. and obviously with these places theres never any lighting on them. the pictures of the car were taken on entry and exit i assume by apr cameras. the driver made a phone call upon returning to the car and thus ended up leaving the car park late, but didnt know you had to leave before the time was up on your ticket, just that you had to return to your car by then. without being able to read the signs there was no way of knowing how the car park was controlled. is this worth including at this stage? does it seem like a good, valid argument?

Coupon-mad

Yes it does, unlit signs can win a case because the terms can't be read.

I would add it and ask specifically for pictures of the signs in hours of darkness...they will not be able to come up with them, I expect. When then gives you something else to say in your defence to the inevitable claim.

System

but didnt know you had to leave before the time was up on your ticket

Was this pay and display? If it was how long after the P&D ticket ran out did you leave?

Shadow0ftheday

It was yes.
About 20 mins.

Shadow0ftheday

Hey guys,

this is what i am thinking i will add in, does this sound okay?
i need to get it sent very soon as the deadline is fast approaching, so after this addition do you think it will be okay to send? or is there anything else i should add?

'Upon entering the car park it was dark, with the signs being unlit and very unclear, there was no possible way for the driver to read the signs. This would therefore mean that a contract could not have been formed. The formation of a contract relies on offer, consideration and acceptance. The driver could not consider the conditions of the contract whilst unable to read them, and thus would not have been able to accept them. Another important aspect was that it has now become known through the use of the ANPR cameras that the driver would have to leave the carpark in question before the time on the ticket had run out. Vastly inadequate signage would have made this impossible for the driver to be aware of this. Whilst the driver had returned to the car in plenty of time, they would have been unaware of the necessity to leave the car park. It is vastly unfair to expect the driver to be able to return to their vehicle having used the full hour they rightly paid for, but also to leave the car park before this time.'

Thank you again.

KeithP

Shadow0ftheday wrote: »

Vastly inadequate signage [STRIKE]would have[/STRIKE] made this impossible for the driver to be aware of this. Whilst the driver had returned to the car in plenty of time, they [STRIKE]would have been[/STRIKE] were unaware of the necessity to leave the car park.

Add the word in blue.

Shadow0ftheday

great thank you!!

Shadow0ftheday

Would you say it will now be okay to send with the changes done?

Coupon-mad

If you are still at 'reply to LBC' stage you could say the Earth was square and BW Legal would still not read it and will proceed with a claim. So it doesn't matter too much.

You need to read ahead, read BW Legal defence threads.