Claim Form Received

ljstmpr

Hi all.
I have received a claim form from a ppc this weekend.
Briefly the first letter I received from the ppc was a final reminder letter sent approx 30 days after the alleged incident.
When the lbccc arrived I asked for the evidence they intended to use but also pointed out that the only letter I had received from the ppc was the final reminder. ( I had 5 from collection agents) They countered by saying that a first letter had been sent and was sent to the same address as all the other letters.
I just feel a bit confused as to what to do next.

onlyfoolsandparking

Send them a SAR, this will get you all the info, pictures you require but bear in mind they are allowed up to 30 days to respond so you will have to get dealing with the claim whilst you are waiting.


Who is the PPC?


What do the POC say exactly?


What is the issue date of claim?


Have you read in the newbies section LBCCC rebuttal letter/s?

Coupon-mad

And see post #2 of the NEWBIES thread for how to acknowledge service of the claim and defend.

ljstmpr

Thank you for the replies.

Having reread a lot of the threads on here I think it may be best for me to start again from the beginning giving the info I think is needed

An alleged parking violation took place
The evidence being used is on an ANPR camera
I was not the driver but I am the registered keeper
The Parking company do not know I was not the driver.

At this point the parking company are saying that a notice to keeper with all the details of the alleged incident was sent 8 days after the event.
I did not receive this letter at the time. (I do now have a copy as it was sent to me when I asked for the evidence they would use after they sent me a lbccc

The first letter I received was the final reminder letter sent approx 30 days after the alleged incident.


It is here where I am getting myself confused.
Do you have many instances of people not receiving letters through the post or have I been the unlucky one.
Also I have been working on the theory that because I did not receive any correspondence within the 14 day period after the alleged incident then I would not be held liable
I would be grateful if someone could clear this up for me

KeithP

But you still haven't answered any of the questions that onlyfoolsandparking asked.

ljstmpr

Thank you for replying to the thread and I am sorry for not replying sooner. The reason I didn’t was because I was unaware of the meaning of some of the abbreviations so went hunting in the newbies thread.

It took a while to read through all but when I had I thought I had found enough information to put forward my defence and afterwards witness statement without needing to bother you again.

Anyway my case was today and I lost. I will briefly tried to outline what happened as I am sure it will be of interest to some of you

Basically my case was two points - Firstly that I had not received the PCN and secondly that an alleged overstay of 18 mins was within the 20 mins grace periods allowed by the code of practise.

The judge at the start briefly summed this as my position and instantly said that he found the arguments about grace periods very weak and that he was not very interested in that side of my argument.

( This totally surprised me and went into a bit of a daze here as it was not what I was expecting to hear and basically knew at that stage that I was not going to win)

Firstly we discussed the PCN issue with the defendant showing the copy of the letter with quite a longish speech and when the judge asked me all I could say really was that I hadn’t received it and could say no more than that for the simple reason I hadn’t

We then discussed the grace periods and the defendant explained why the arguments I made were invalid and gave a reasoning which I did not understand

It was then my turn to speak and I should add here that having read the newbies thread (A big thanks to all those who give advice there) In my witness statement I enclosed the BPA Operator Scheme Code of Practice as exhibit 1 and emphasised section 4.1 and also sections 13.2 13.3 and 13.4. I also enclosed the Kevin Reynolds statement as exhibit 2 and again quoted it on the witness statement.

I started by saying that the defendant as a member was bound by it rules and highlighted sections 13.2 and 13.4. The judge seemed unsure about 13.2 so I highlighted the Kevin Reynolds statement at which point he looked confused and went searching through my evidence pack to locate it. I said the point of the statement was to alleviate the doubt about this point but he was still searching and only then read it. Having read it he made no comment so I continued by showing the contract the defendant had with the landowner were they also stated that they would abide by BPA rules and then left it there. I was not too sure what else to say and I was still in somewhat of a daze.


In summing up the judge looking through the defendants documents said that he would have to take it on face value that the ntk was sent and therefore deemed served (even though I reminded him that I had not received it nor had been given proof that it had been posted) and then said something about the grace periods and why it didn’t apply although again I can’t really remember what it was

I left the court stunned and it was only when I got back on the train that I started to frantically write down notes and try to remember what happened and what was said.


So that was my day in court. Thank you for listening

I would also like ti emphasise that I am posting this in case it is of interest to some. I am not blaming anybody at all and basically just feel a bit unlucky.

The_Deep

Without knowing why the judge dismissed the grace period argument it is difficult to comment.

However, I am surprised, given the huge amount of mail that seems to go missing, he took the word of the scammer that an NTK was sent. I suspect that OP did not fight his corner hard enough.

Coupon-mad

Bad luck.

You should have argued about the signs and the landowner authority too, they must always be scrutinised and both points are capable of winning a defended case.

Which PPC was it?

Which court?

Don't tell me the Judge also allowed the fake £60 'debt collector' costs add-on that all defendants here are primed to argue clearly don't exist and are an abuse of process? Did you speak about that issue to at least nullify the costs that are clearly unrecoverable and mendacious?

ljstmpr

I haven't had the court report yet

The ppc was Britannia and it was in Birmingham County Court

There was no £60 Debt collector cost

Redx

you wont get a court report


the court report is YOUR REPORT of what happened from start to finish on the day, in your own words (your own personal account)

Coupon-mad

Britannia/BW Legal always add a fake £60 to the PCN, so was that disallowed?