BW Legal and TPS at it again!

Parajedic

Hi good folks, thank you all for your continued support over the years and with your help I've been able to bat a few of these firms into touch but could do with some advice.
Letter received from BW Legal this morning with regards to an unknown PCN issued. I say unknown because the first the keeper heard about it was this letter from BW Legal. Interestingly the letter they sent included a letter from Total Parking Solutions with their current address on so there should be no reason why they hadn't first been contacted by them.

The letter from BW Legal states;

"We have been instructed by Total Parking Solutions Limited in relation to the Balance Due for the above PCN.

The Balance Due includes the £50.00 PCN charge plus Our Client's initial legal costs of £54.00, which are detailed in the car park or signage terms and conditions. Our Client's terms and conditions are clearly displayed in our client signage.

As you have failed to make a payment or raise an appeal within 28 days from the date of the PCN, the Balance Due remains outstanding and we require payment in full within 16 days from the date of this letter. If you fail to make payment or provide reasons for non-payment within the specified timeframe, we will seek Our Client's instructions to commence Court proceedings against you, which may result in you receiving a Letter of Claim pursuant to the Pre-action protocol for Debt Claims as contained within the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR)."

The letter is dated 8th November 2018 and as they refer to the potential of issuing of a Letter of Claim would I be right in not viewing this letter as one or interpreting it as a Letter Before Claim..
The contravention description is that "The vehicle did not display a valid pay and display ticket or the ticket had expired"
It lists the PCN as :Manual with a contravention date of the 27th July 2018.

No evidence has been forwarded either.

How would you recommend I proceed, aside from dropping a SAR.

Thanks in advance, keep up the amazing work!

KeithP

The phrase "may result in you receiving a Letter of Claim" should help you to decide whether this letter is a Letter of Claim or not.

Fruitcake

Yes it's a LBC, so follow the guide to court you will find in post 2 of the NEWBIES.

Yes to sending TPS a SAR, and also ask the DVLA who requested The Keeper's personal data and when, from the day before that of the alleged event until now.
Include a copy of the V5 as proof of ID for the SAR

You should edit your post to remove information about who did what. Only ever refer to The Driver and The Keeper, not how someone is related to someone else.
Parking scammers read these fora.

beamerguy

If this an LBA, they have broken the protocol

It's just a chase up letter because a real LBA must include proof of their claim and 30 days to respond ... not 16 days

They say .....
"If you fail to make payment or provide reasons for non-payment within the specified timeframe, we will seek Our Client's instructions to commence Court proceedings against you, which may result in you receiving a Letter of Claim pursuant to the Pre-action protocol for Debt Claims as contained within the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR)"

£50 is a low claim so watch BWLegal as they add fake add-ons

Any claim that a court will allow is.

£50 for the ticket
£25 court fee
£50 legal fees

Anything more will be fake add-ons by BWLegal trying to extort money from you

Check the signs, do they really say that £54 as initial legal costs will be added ???

Parajedic

Thank you everybody. I'll treat as a Letter Before Claim and give them both barrels of the proverbial CPR / SAR shotgun. Great work!

Quentin

This isn't a lbcca

Were their any forms enclosed to return?

Also see #2!!

beamerguy

Parajedic wrote: »

Thank you everybody. I'll treat as a Letter Before Claim and give them both barrels of the proverbial CPR / SAR shotgun. Great work!

WHY ???

A real LBA is where they show their hand with 30 days to respond.

Right now they are in chase mode

You start doing things ad lib without help of the forum, could end in disaster for you

Just wait for a real LBA when you can hit them with both barrels

A SAR is good, keeps their tiny minds occupied

Parajedic

Hi all,
Thanks again for your ongoing help.
I sent this letter to them and got the following reply.....
Dear Sirs,

Thank you for your Letter Before Claim dated 8th November 2018, reference: PCN/xxxxxxxxx
I wish to make my position known by four points for your consideration.
Firstly, this is the first correspondence received from your client with no previous letters of claim regarding a parking charge notice (PCN), no Notice To Keeper (NTK) and subsequently no opportunity to appeal prior to yourselves being appointed. Subsequently I believe that due legal process required to trigger your letter has not been followed.

Secondly your letter contains insufficient detail of the claim and fails to provide copies of evidence your clients places reliance upon.

Your client must know that since 1st 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 clients to provide. Your clients must not issue proceedings without complying with that protocol. I reserve the right to draw any failure of the Claimant to comply with the protocol to the attention of the court and to ask the court to stay the claim and order your client to comply with its pre-action obligations, 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 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 clients) 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 unevidenced 'Letter of Claim' in complete ignorance of the pre-existing Practice Direction and the new Protocol.

Nobody, including your clients, are immune from the requirements and obligations of the Practice Direction and now the Protocol.
I therefore 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
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 the 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.!

Thirdly, I am writing to your company - BW Legal and clients Total Parking Solutions Limited in capacity of Data Protection. I have reason to believe you hold personal data on myself as a vehicle I owned and were the registered keeper for visits to car!parking!sites managed by your client. It should be noted that contrary to article 13 of GDPR legislation no privacy information was provided to myself, the data subject, at the time of collection. I am therefore compelled into making this request for access to personal data pursuant to Article 15 of the General Data Protection Regulation. which, as you will be aware, came into force on 25 May 2018!

I would like you to be aware at the outset, that I anticipate a reply to my request within one month as required under Article 12, failing which I will be forwarding my inquiry with a letter of complaint to the Information Commissioners Office (ICO).

Please advise as to the following:
1. Please confirm to me whether or not my personal data is being processed. If it is, please provide me with the categories of personal data you have about me in your files and databases.
1.a. In particular, please tell me what you know about me in your information systems, whether or not contained in databases, and including e-mail, documents on your networks, or voice or other media that you may store.

1.b. Additionally, please advise me in which countries my personal data is stored, or accessible from. In case you make use of cloud services to store or process my data, please include the countries in which the servers are located where my data are or were (in the past 12 months) stored.
1.c. Please provide me with a copy of, or access to, my personal data that you have or are processing.
2. Please provide me with a detailed accounting of the specific uses and lawful basis that you have made, are making or will be making of my personal data.
3. Please provide a list of all third parties with whom you have (or may have) shared my personal data.
3.a. If you cannot identify with certainty the specific third parties to whom you have disclosed my personal data, please provide a list of third parties to whom you may have disclosed my personal data.
3.b. Please also identify which jurisdictions that you have identified above that these third parties with whom you have or may have shared my personal data, from which these third parties have stored or can access my personal data. Please also provide insight in the legal grounds for transferring my personal data to these jurisdictions. Where you have done so, or are doing so, on the basis of appropriate safeguards, please provide a copy.
3.c Additionally, I would like to know what safeguards have been put in place in relation to these third parties that you have identified in relation to the transfer of my personal data.
4. Please advise how long you store my personal data, and if retention is based upon the category of personal data, please identify how long each category is retained.
5. If you are additionally collecting personal data about me from any source other than me, please provide me with all information about their source, as referred to in Article 14 of the GDPR.
6. If you are making automated decisions about me, including profiling, whether or not on the basis of Article 22 of the GDPR, please provide me with information concerning the basis for the logic in making such automated decisions, and the significance and consequences of such processing.
Fourthly, I request that you contact me via postal letter only and therefore request that you cease and desist from any further contact via electronic means, ie Telephone, E-mail or Social Media. Ignoring this request will be viewed as an act of harassment and may potentiate a criminal claim against BW Legal and clients Total Parking Solutions Limited.

Kind Regards,

So this was their reply which I might add included photos of the parked vehicle but no photos of the signage or obviously inclusion of their Client's Landowner Contract. As for whether they've responded to the SAR...... Obviously not yet! It's interesting that they state that the only right the respondant had to enter the land in question were on the Terms and Conditions when in fact they had right to enter the land as that is their place of employment. I notice also that they have ignored requests such as how charges are calculated etc. Anyway, this was their reply....

"We write in reference to the above matter.

Please be advised that Our Client had issued the correspondence regarding this contravention to the address of the Registered Keeper of this vehicle - information which is provided to them by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency. It is your responsibility to ensure that this information it kept up to date, to ensure that important correspondence is able to reach you.

For your benefit, we have enclosed a copy of all correspondence issued by Our Client and photographic evidence of the vehicle at the location of the contravention. We must emphasise that in order to use the facility it is your responsibility to abide by the Terms and Conditions. As the vehivcle involved in the contravention was parked without displaying a valid Pay and Display Ticket, or the Ticket had expired, these Terms and conditions were broken.

In response to the further points raised in your correspondence:

1. Our Client's cause of action is that you breached the Terms and Conditions of the contract which you entered into by parking your vehicle in the car park, by failing to display a valid Pay & Display Ticket or the Ticket had expired.

2. Our Client is pursuing you as the Registered Keeper of the vehicle.

3. Our Client does intend to rely on Schedule 4 of Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

4. The details of the claim are that your vehicle parked without displaying a valid Pay and Display Ticket, or the Ticket had expired. The vehicle was observed at Scarborough General Hospital car park on 27 July 2018 at 15.24 by the Parking Attendant.

The £50.00 charge is regarded as a charge for contravening the Terms and Conditions. The sum payable following the issue of the Parking Charge Notice occurs on the happening of a specific event (i.e a material breach of the Terms and Conditions) and is therefore a core term of Our Client's contract with you.

It is irrelevant whether or not the charge as displayed bears any relation to the cost for parking
(even where there is no cost involved). Our Client relies on the leading authority of
ParkingEye Limited v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67, where the Supreme Court held that Parking Charge Notices, like this charge, serve a legitimate commercial interest. The relevant car parking Codes of Practice, also give guidance that £50.00 is a reasonable sum to charge

The signage in situ makes provision for Our Client to recover any additional costs
(Contractual Costs) incurred by them in relation to the Parking Charge Notice. The Contractual Costs referred to above formed part of the Terms and Conditions (of the parking contract) which were
accepted by you in the course of staying at the car park. Save for the fact that the sum of
£54.00 attributable towards these costs are entirely reasonable for nature and type of work
involved in recovering the parking charge, such costs are recoverable under the relevant
parking code of practice

5. The Parking Charge Notice which you have been issued with is for a breach of contract. The only right which you have to enter the land in question are on the Terms and Conditions which apply. The signage at the car park is prominent, on which the Terms and Conditions are clearly displayed. It is unnecessary to apply an analysis of offer, acceptance and consideration quite simply because the contract was formed on mutual promises. By parking your vehicle in the car park you have entered into a unilateral contract with Our Client.
Acceptance does not have to be communicated, the act of parking your vehicle is acceptance. The contract was formed on the contravention date between Our Client and the driver of the vehicle. As the Registered Keeper of the vehicle, and given that you had not provided Our Client with the full name and serviceable address of the driver within 28 days from the date of the Parking Charge Notice, Our Client is able to hold you liable for the unpaid parking charge under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

6. This is not a claim for trespass

7. Please be aware that the contract between Our Client and the landowner is a legally privileged document which you have no right to inspect. However, should this matter progress to court, the contract will be adduced as evidence.

8. Our client is under no obligation to supply this.

9. As established members of the British Parking Association, Our Client adheres
to their Code of Practice for Private Enforcement on Private Land and Unregulated Car Parks
(Code of Practice'). This Code of Practice gives recommendations in regards to the signage
within the Car Park. The signs within the car park comply with the recommendations in the
Code of Practice and are therefore deemed reasonable.

10. £50.00 remains unpaid for the Parking Charge Notice. Additionally, you are also liable for our £54.00 instructions fee as your file has been passed to us.

11. This will be issued in due course.

As a result of the breach, Our client is well within their contractual rights to issue the Parking Charge Notice and take all necessary steps (including bringing legal proceedings) to recover the outstanding charge. Please note that Our Client will not accept a settlement for this Account, therefore the Outstanding Balance remains Due and Owing.

We trust that the above resolves your outstanding query. Please note that your requests relating to your personal data have been passed to the relevant department who will respond separately.

Should you require any further assistance please contact our office on 0113 4870432"

So, my next question is how to suitable reply.

Many thanks again people, oh and a Merry Christmas to you all......

KeithP

Parajedic wrote: »

So, my next question is how to suitable reply.

You do not need to reply to that.

You are still waiting for a Letter of Claim from them. You have not yet received a Letter of Claim from them.

Coupon-mad

LOL, charging an imaginary £54, to recover £50, and they think that's reasonable?!

beamerguy

It is like dealing with a brick wall with BWLegal

BEAVIS v PARKING EYE in the Supreme Court
Often, these powerless debt collectors make reference
to the Parking Eye/Supreme court case ? They seem to
think that this is the key for them to extort money from
you.
Barry Beavis took Parking Eye to court because he claimed
the charges were unfair. The court said they were ... and
that was it. So unless you are claiming that the charge
was unfair, the Supreme court decision has no bearing
on you and it's yet more rubbish that debt crawlers use

What part of this don't BWLegal understand ?

£54 instruction fee ... this is like having a try on with Judge Rinder

£50 parking charge
£25 court fee
£50 legal fee
maybe a small amount of interest.

an extra £54 = NO,,,,, it's their way of inflating a claim