Can someone clarify something for me please?

Hilee87

Thank you.
The disheartening thing in all of this (as someone close has pointed out) the PCNs were ignored and does this not give SCS Law a reason to pursue payment?

They have included all the relevant items as part of PaP as far as I can see.

Umkomaas

Hilee87 wrote: »

Thank you.
The disheartening thing in all of this (as someone close has pointed out) the PCNs were ignored and does this not give SCS Law a reason to pursue payment?

They have included all the relevant items as part of PaP as far as I can see.

Whether ignored or not, multiple PCNs are more vulnerable to litigation than single, one-offs. UKPC's starting point seems to be at around £600 mark.

If you think that the PaP is satisfied, then respond to the LBC - but don't rush it, use the 30 day deadline to get your head around this stuff. Just one point on the PaP - have they provided all photographs they hold of your vehicle?

Why nor SAR-bomb UKPC and ask them to provide everything the hold on you, then you can compare each bundle of documents containing your data. If there are gaps between them, something for you to exploit later in any defence of your case. A SAR is now free, and they have to respond in 1 calendar month, which will be about the time you have to respond to the LBC.

You have to employ every option open to you, especially with potentially £800 costs hanging over you.

Hilee87

Wow thanks for that!
Its noticed when re reading the PaP they haven't included photos of the vehicle. Who/where would be best to contact to get that information? UKPC or SCS?

Would it be helpful to post a picture of the letter recieved?

Loadsofchildren123

You deal with the solicitors now, not the PPC.


If you read the protocol, there is a specific paragraph that says you can request information/evidence, and they must supply it.
So write your response, and in it ask for what you want and say "for the avoidance of doubt, this is a request for information made under paragraph x of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims".


Can you just have a think about my next point, and include something about it in your response to the LBC (you don't just respond to criticise it, but respond with what you believe your defence to be, namely that you DID comply with t&cs by displaying your permit). Why was it possible for them to take photographs where your permit can't be seen if it was displayed? Did they deliberately take photos from an angle which obscured the permit? Eg can you see the permit when you are near to or right by the car, but can't see it from a distance because of the slope of your dashboard?


If I'm right, take your own photographs. Put the permit where it normally is. Take a photograph standing by the car, in which the permit can be seen. Take a few steps back then photograph it again when it can be partially seen. Finally, take another photograph from a further distance where it can't be seen. Send them these. Tell them that your permit WAS displayed at all times, and their photographs appear to have been deliberately taken from an angle at which the permit cannot be seen. Explain that you have taken your own photographs (enclosed), all taken on x date within a 2 minute window, with the permit displayed in the same position it always is. Photograph 1 was taken close up to the vehicle. Photograph 2 was taken at 3/4/5 (whatever) paces away. Photograph 3 was taken at x paces away (approx. x metres). The permit can clearly be seen in photographs 1 and 2 but not in photographs 3, although when that photograph was taken the permit was displayed in exactly the same position as shown in photographs 1/2. This clearly demonstrates that their photographs have been taken at an angle/distance which obscures the permit (whether deliberately or inadvertently).


Reiterate that your permit was displayed at all times and that any claim will be bound to fail and will be robustly defended. You can also say that if they still choose to pursue a claim in these circumstances, then you will seek a costs order against them pursuant to CPR Rule 27.14(2)(g).

Loadsofchildren123

just noticed you've said they didn't send you photos.


Reply asking for them and reiterating that your position is your permit was clearly displayed at all times. Say you are asking for the photos under para x of the PAP and you are clearly entitled to them.


Do your experiment with distances and angles anyway, because if they have photos then this will be your defence and you'll need to demonstrate how easy it is to take a photo where the permit can't be seen.

Hilee87

Thank you for taking the time to reply.
You have got the nail on the head in terms of the permit couldn't be seen if standing at a certain angle etc.
Requests for photos will be sent through as this should prove that

Umkomaas

Requests for photos will be sent through as this should prove that

Make sure you build this formally in your response to SCS and include the identical question in your SAR-bomb to UKPC to find those cracks.

Hilee87

Can I draft the response and post it on here and see if it can be read through?

I don't want to miss anything.

Thanks

KeithP

Hilee87 wrote: »

Can I draft the response and post it on here and see if it can be read through?

Of course you can.

Haven't you already seen that that is exactly what others do here?

Hilee87

Can I ask wat this refers to/means please?

"Reiterate that your permit was displayed at all times and that any claim will be bound to fail and will be robustly defended. You can also say that if they still choose to pursue a claim in these circumstances, then you will seek a costs order against them pursuant to CPR Rule 27.14(2)(g).

Thanks in advance