Driver observed leaving site whilst vehicle remained parked on premises

Smaru

Thank you Umkomaas. That is really helpful:).The Newbie thread also says that SAR should/could be sent to their solicitors and to the Landowner...ofcourse all of this is in the context of LBCC. But Ihave also seen other posts where it says that after the claim has been issued do not communicate with the solicitors...unsure whethe to send only to the PPC or all the three.

Umkomaas

But Ihave also seen other posts where it says that after the claim has been issued do not communicate with the solicitors...unsure whethe to send only to the PPC or all the three.

If a claim is issued via solicitors, then communication should be primarily via the solicitors. But that really is the direct context of the claim. Send the SAR to the sols and the PPC (in particular). I've not gone back through the thread, but I'm not sure where the landowner comes into the SAR equation. Would the landowner hold any of your personal data?

Smaru

[FONT=&quot]Thank you ,Umkomaas.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] I will send the SAR to BW LEGAL and TPS .
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][/FONT][FONT=&quot]As for your query re the landowner, this is what Couponmad says in the Newbie thread :[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]As well as the SAR to the parking firm's Data Protection Officer (DPO), also write a letter - it can be sent by email to Gladstones or BW Legal or directly to whoever the PPC is, if they are not using a solicitor. ………. [/FONT]
Oh, and it is always a VERY good idea to complain to the Landowner or retailer, and LBC stage is your chance. When faced with a polite but ''angry customer who will never return'' complaint, Landowners/retailers cancel these, very often, at commercial car park sites .



[FONT=&quot]The retailer (who is the landlord probably) might have ANPR and CCTV images-should I send the SAR to them do you think? All of Couponmad's advice is in the context of LBCC.
[/FONT][FONT=&quot].[/FONT]

Umkomaas

Coupon is talking about a complaint to the landowner, not a SAR. The landowner won't have ANPR cameras - they're PPC 'weapons'.

CCTV - they may have. When you write to them, tell them what you look like so they know how to identify you. Should be an easy enough job if you are famous, 8 feet tall or have three heads. Otherwise - I'd not bother!

Smaru

Ahh,I see it now..as it was all under SAR in the Newbie post, I (stupidly) assumed even the landlord retailer received a SAR



Thank you for the advice...:D...decided not to bother with the complaint

Smaru

I have sort of written a rough,patch work draft but am now filled with deep self-doubt due to the following reason:
BW Legal who has sent the claim form has the following on the claim form sent on Nov 28.The claimants claim is for the sum of XX being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant in respect of a Parking Charge Notice for a parking contravention which occured on (date) in the car park at (location).
My query is this : BW legal has not specified any particlars of the contravention in their Claim Form sent late November . However, they do mention this in the letter of claim in October.They represent TPS whose letters to the registered keeper for 'driver leaving the premises' we had previously ignored.They are no more in the picture , and it is BWLegal who is pursuing this claim.So, in writing my defence , should I even mention the 'driver leaving premsies' as BWLegal has not specified anything on the Claim Form? .

Thank you in advance,,,appreciate it is the festive season, and most forumers are shopping or partying

Redx

post the exact POC details and the breakdown of charges and total claimed in a reply


until people see the POC, they have no idea how to answer your query

Smaru

Thank you ,RedX. I have typed out the Claim exactly as it appears in the Claim Form.As you can see, it does not give any specifics of who (driver/keeper) is the defendant , the nature of contravention etc. (I do haveall those details on the earlier Letter of Claim though).Hope this is of help .
Claimant:
Total Parking Solutions
Kettring



Address for sending documents abd payments
BW Legal
Leeds

The Particulars of the Claim:
The Claimant's claim is for the sum of £ 203.28 being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant in respect of a Parking Charge Notice for a parking contravention which occured on (date) in the car park at (location) in relation to a (details of make and registration vehicle) .The Defendant was allowed 28 dyas from the PCN issue Date to pay,but failed to do so.Despite demand having been made, the Defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability,The Claim also includes Stautory Interest pursuant to section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum ( a daily rate of 4.28 from date XXX to date XXX) being an amount of £ 4.28.The claimant also claims contractual costs as set out in the Terms and Conditions.

The claimant believes that the facts stated in this claim form are true and I am duly authorised by the claimant to sign this statement.

Signed (Name).................
(Clamimant's Legal representative)

Redx

no , do not mention anything not on the MCOL form

your defence must address the POC and legal reasons why the KEEPER is not liable for this charge (assuming that the driver was not identified)

stick to the claim form and draft your defence accordingly, your judgment is being clouded due to previous paperwork where they have alleged something that they would not put in writing on the claim form

and I also asked for the breakdown of charges plus total claimed, but can only see the total claimed and no breakdown

this will get very tedious if we have to drag every piece of information from you bit by bit, it also prolongs the thread and time taken to get a cohesive reply

your defence should object to any "hidden costs" in that breakdown, hence why I asked for this information to be written

the reason they have not specified keeper or driver is to complicate matters by keeping it ambiguous , especially if the keeper was not the driver and they dont know who the driver was

proving that somebody left the site and is liable is a hard task for them to prove, hence the ambiguity

deal with what is in front of you, not the lies they alleged previously

if the keeper was not the driver, say so

if they failed to hold the keeper liable in law (POFA2012 etc) - say so

start with the BARGEPOLE concise defence and work in these other issues, to refute the POC and the extra charges

Smaru

Thank you so much RedX.You are right,I was totally carried over by all the reading I did , and all the letters from TPS and BWLegal . It is outrageous that after all the harassment, they have send such a sketchy ,dodgy claim letter

and I also asked for the breakdown of charges plus total claimed, but can only see the total claimed and no breakdown

I am so sorry :I have typed out word to word everything on the Claim form.This is all it says. But in a column adjacent they have this:
Amount claimed 128.28
Court Fee 25
Legal Rep cost 50
Total amount 203.28.
Sorry once again that you have had to ask fordetails a second time.
I will look at Bargepole defences and build my defences strictly based on the the claim form details...will make no mention at all about driver leaving premises , etc.
If you have anything futher to add after seeing the brakdown of charges,I will be grateful to hear about it so that I can include in my defence .
Thanks again.