Small Claim Now Issued - bwlegal - letter of claim, reply then response, next steps

D_P_Dance

Why do people include stuff. the meanijg of which they do not understand?.  

samboella

Okay, thanks for clarifying.  I will remove it and send a new bundle.

@D_P_Dance, is your comment supposed to be helpful?  I used a letter which, back in 2018, I was instructed to use from the newbies thread to obtain further information.  I would say the vast majority of us are here because we are not legal professionals and so we are here looking for assistance and guidance because after all, we all have the common goal of trying to stop these parking companies scamming people.  If we were all as knowledgeable as you, we wouldn't' be here in the first place.

Perhaps I have done something stupid but I fail to see why making condescending comments is in any way helpful to someone who is already rather nervous about an impending court hearing.  I'd also just like to mention that there are thousands of threads on here and trawling through all of them to try and piece together something which a) makes sense, b) stands up in court and c) doesn't make you like a complete moron is pretty difficult so please, be kind.  There is no need to be rude.

Coupon-mad

We get it, and people wouldn't know what WP means or that it matters, but it does, do put it right now and stick around here!

And do the consultation unless you've finished it already and done the MHCLG questions too:

An urgent task – deadline is MONDAY!

Please now make a real difference because not enough people have yet, and time is running out. 

The Government is consulting for just a few more days, about a new statutory code of practice (CoP) and framework intended to rein in the rogue parking firms. 

Does it go far enough?  Read and comment on the draft CoP proposal and the enforcement framework consultation (two separate consultation documents).

HOW TO DO THE SUBMISSIONS:

BSI PAS 232 – COMMENTING ON THE CODE OF PRACTICE AS DRAFTED :

1.    You will need to register then log in, to comment on the CoP and enter an occupation even if you are retired or a homemaker.  

 

2.    Register, log into the BSI page, and download & read the cover letter here:

https://standardsdevelopment.bsigroup.com/projects/2020-00193#/section

 

3.    Read the cover letter again and note the suggested extra questions... if you agree that, say, the 'loading/unloading and dropping off, asking for directions, and disabled people parking on double yellows as they can on street' activities listed should be exempt (not parking events, what do you think?) then please go to the Annexes at the end of the PAS Code and find the one about Exempt Vehicles and state what other activity you think should be added to the exempt list. 

 

4.    Download the PAS itself and start commenting on what you wish to say something about.  Quick links to each section appear on the left of your page. 

 

You don’t have to comment on everything, e.g. you might want to skip the definitions and focus on later sections, and certainly look at the Annex tables at the end that show things like consideration & grace periods and exemptions.

 

5.    Submit comments when you are happy with them. Don’t just ‘SAVE’ and forget!

 

THAT IS HALF THE JOB DONE!

THE MHCLG CONSULTATION IS EASIER AS IT IS JUST A LIST OF QUESTIONS. 

 

6.    You can do it first if preferred or pushed for time:

https://forms.office.com/Pages/ResponsePage.aspx?id=EGg0v32c3kOociSi7zmVqAVPfAOtwRxLhHRwQ610oElUMzhQSVo0WUQ4SERVSEZaUU9DTUhFQ1VMUy4u

If your answers exceed 4000 characters (approx. 500 words to a single question or 16000 words (approx. 2500 words) for all the questions below, you can email your answers to parking@communities.gov.uk as long as you state who you are.

 

THESE ARE THE QUESTIONS YOU WILL SEE, FOR RESPONSES TO THE FRAMEWORK:

Q1 Do you agree or disagree that members of APAs should be required to use a single appeals service appointed by the Secretary of State?

Strongly agree/Somewhat agree/Neither agree nor disagree/Somewhat disagree/Strongly disagree

 

Q1.1 Please explain your answer

(free text)

 

 

Q2 Please provide any other feedback on the determination of appeals, including the funding model and features that an appeal service should offer e.g. telephone or in-person hearings, the ability to submit evidence online

(free text)

 

Q3 Please provide any comments you have on the proposal to enforce the Code by combining the ATA’s existing audit procedures with additional safeguards.

(free text)

 

Q4 Please outline any alternative means by which the Code could be monitored and enforced. You may wish to cite evidence from other regulatory frameworks which are relevant.

(free text)

 

Q5 Please provide any feedback you have on the proposed governance arrangements for monitoring the new Code of Practice

(free text)

 

Q6 Which parking charge system is most appropriate for private parking?

 a) the Three-tiered system

 b) Mirroring the Local Authority system

(free text)

 

 Q6.1 Please explain your answer. You may, for example, wish to make reference to other deterrent frameworks (for example, for railway tickets or traffic violations)

(free text)

 

 

Q7 What level of discount is appropriate:

40% as is currently offered in private parking and suggested in the three-tiered system, or

50% as is offered in Local Authority parking?

a) 40%

b) 50%

 

Q7.1 Please explain your answer, including whether the discount should be set at a different level

(free text)

 

 

 Q8 How should the level of parking charges be set and how should the levels be revised in future?

(free text)

 

 

Q9 Do you agree or disagree in principle with the idea of the Appeals Charter?

Agree/Disagree

 

Q9.1 Please explain your answer

(free text)

 

 

Q10 Do you agree or not that the examples given in the Appeals Charter are fair and appropriate? Agree/Disagree

 

Q10.1 Please explain your answer.

You may wish, for example, to suggest additional cases to be covered in an Appeals Charter or query existing examples.

(free text)

 

Q11 Do you agree or disagree that the parking industry should contribute towards the cost of the regulation?

Agree/Disagree

 

Q11.1 Please explain your answer.

(free text)

 

YOU CAN INSTEAD GIVE MORE CONCISE ANSWERS ONLINE, USING THE MHCLG PAGE LINK.

Don’t forget that answering these questions is the easier bit…

Looking at the BSI PAS (the draft code of practice itself) involves logging in and submitting comments again, and again and again and takes more time!

There is a discussion about PAS submissions and what the pages look like, here:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6195417/am-i-doing-something-wrong/p1

D_P_Dance

@D_P_Dance, is your comment supposed to be helpful?  

No, I was expressing my frustration at people who do not do even the most basic research before engaging in such matters.  A few minutes on a search engine would have saved you a lot of time.  Your ignorance of legal procedures may well have annoyed the judge

samboella

@D_P_Dance but your frustration was essentially directed at me.  I come here as a last resort when I don't fully understand something.  I am not a complete Luddite and indeed searched up the meaning online before I asked the question.  But understanding what something means doesn't automatically mean that one then understands how it can be applied.

As it turns out, on double-checking the objection by bwLegal, they are objecting that I've copied in one of their most recent email communications in which they refer to WP all the way through - presumably knowing full well that I wouldn't be able to reference it in my WS.  So it wasn't some wording I used at all.

Thank you for the additional information about the consultation @Coupon-mad this will definitely make it easier for me to respond, which I shall do this weekend as I'm hoping my WS will be done and dusted in the next hour with no further amendments needed.

nosferatu1001

As said, I would definitely rebut their lack of comm assertion, and state that your only proof is in the form of an email chain which was sent without prejudice 
you ask that the court either allows you to submit this evidence or that the court asks the claimant to strike their assertion out as it would be unfair to let it stand when they know it is a lie but not one you are allowed to rebut 

that, to my mind, makes their position so much worse. By objecting they're making themselves knowingly dishonest, because they have seen those emails, yet have still submitted a WS saying the complete opposite. 

samboella

Just thought I would provide an update on this.
I went through the very nerve-wrecking experience of a BT Meet Me Hearing today. I was very nervous and despite getting all my paperwork and references in order with a pretty decent crib sheet, I still found it hard and don't think I'd made my points as well as I would have liked had I not been so nervous.  But anyway I had what I consider to be a partial victory.
Sadly the claim was not completely struck out but the judge agreed that the £60 additional charge was unfair under the POFA 2012 and it was not awarded to the claimant and neither were the solicitor fees or interest.
So I came away with a reduced fee from £270 to £150, which overall I'm happy with.  It was even £30 quid less than bwLegal's final pre-court settlement offer.  So I'm pleased that bwLegal did not get away with the double-recovery of £60, after all, that' what we're fighting.  I'm just glad it's all over and can be put to bed.
Thanks to everyone who offered advice. Very much appreciated.
I am going to remove the previous link to the initial WS I posted as I made significant changes to it once I realised a lot of it wasn't relevant and I don't wish to confuse people who may be reading it for reference.

Coupon-mad

Ahhh, that's a shame that you didn't win.  Did the Judge decide that the signs were clear then, and that the driver accepted a contract?

nosferatu1001

Indeed, shame on not winning - as above, what were the grounds for their win?