Armtrac and BW Legal

The_Deep

be pro-active from now on, not reactive

Have you complained to your MP yet?

Redx

Jukebox696969 wrote: »

Thanks for this, I have sent a SAR to Armtrac and will respond to BW Legal shortly.

At this point, should i include some information as to why I refute the PCN? I don't know if that's a good idea, or if its giving them information that i will be relying on should it go to court?

good , 1 down and 1 to go , now get the LBC rebuttal done asap

if you had read thoise threads I told you about, you would see a pattern for an LBC rebuttal

an LBC rebuttal refutes their claim, so it seems obvious to me that you lay down YOUR FACTS as to why YOU refute the claim

the vehicle was authorised to be there as the parking space was paid for

the permit was correctly displayed in the vehicle at the time the vehicle was parked

there was no loss to the landowner or anyone else

they have no cause of action

etc


this isnt rocket science, its you telling them why their client has no cause of action and that it will be brought up in any defence and witness statement

however, you must word this bespoke LBC rebuttal, then email it to B W LEGAL (copying your own EMAIL ADDRESS into the TO box, so you get a proof of delivery and a copy as well), also telling them to put the claim on hold and consult with their client, to whom you have issued a SAR

AT THIS STAGE DONT USE THEIR FORMS AND DONT DO ANYTHING OTHER THAN WHAT YOU HAVE BEEN TOLD, (which is the same advice in all those other threads)

so we keep saying , get PROACTIVE, not REACTIVE

this is all the starters to the main course, so this all adds to your case should they issue an MCOL , but you really need to study the game by reading other threads, instead of just being spoonfed on a piecemeal basis, otherwise this will become tedious when an MCOL arrives

Jukebox696969

Is this too simple? i'm not sure if I need to add all the other quotes about previous cases etc?

Good Afternoon,

I have sent your client a Subject Access Request (SAR), by email, directly to their data protection team.

As you will be aware, I am legally entitled under data protection law to request the data relating to myself. As I am still be awaiting their response for his SAR (for which the PPC have one calendar month to respond). Under these circumstances, I require a restriction of data processing and that the case should be put 'on hold'.

I refute the parking claim made against me by your client.

The vehicle was authorised to be there as the parking space was paid for in advance on a 6 monthly basis (I have the invoice for the space I was parked in when given a ticket).

The permit was correctly displayed in the vehicle at the time the vehicle was parked. Only after the vehicle had been parked did the valid permit fall off the window.

There was no loss to the landowner or anyone else

I believe neither B W Legal or your client have any cause of action to continue this claim against me.

Redx

I would NOT be mentioning about any permit falling off any window at this stage, leave that for later

the rest seems ok to me, and it doesnt have to be war and peace, it should state that their client has no cause of action and the basics, plus that SAR request , which the rest of it seems to contain

other members may have a different opinion however

Jukebox696969

Yes, I emailed the local MP.... no reply as of yet.

Jukebox696969

One thing i do need to get straight is, I am not, nor was I ever the registered keeper..... It was a lease car through my company, so I do not even know who the registered keeper was. I don't believe I have ever said I was driving the car, I just said it was my car parked in my space. Will any of this make a difference?
In the many many letters sent to me, they state "As you have not paid the fine, nor told us you are not the registered keeper". so I assume from that they believe I am. Have they messed up here or have I?

Thanks again.

Redx

thats a matter for you and the court and the judge

a judge (or the claimant) can easily ask if you were the driver in court, especially if the car was authorised to park there and had a permit and was hired to your company, which puts you on a sticky point, as you cannot commit perjury, and judges dont like evasiveness

the MY in any reply could easily infer who was driving, as could the initial contact from you

at the initial stages, they need to follow POFA2012 and get the hire docs, but I believe that you are on a sticky wicket for POFA2012, but good grounds for being the driver, especially if you appealed and they never obtained DVLA details (which would then mean that the hire co nominated you as hirer and gave your name and address)

personally, I think that admittance of who was driving and sticking to your "contracted to park and bought and paid for" has more weight with any judge etc

but its your call and I have no legal training

Jukebox696969

Agreed, I think no matter who was driving, the fact that the parking space is paid for in full 6 months in advance should be my strongest argument. So I will send the below.

Good Afternoon,

I have sent your client a Subject Access Request (SAR), by email, directly to their data protection team.

As you will be aware, I am legally entitled under data protection law to request the data relating to myself. As I am still be awaiting their response for his SAR (for which the PPC have one calendar month to respond). Under these circumstances, I require a restriction of data processing and that the case should be put 'on hold'.

I refute the parking claim made against me by your client. I also refute the additional £60 charge you have applied, which is double recovery.

The vehicle was authorised to be there as the parking space was paid for in advance on a 6 monthly basis (I have the invoice for the space I was parked in when given a ticket).

The permit was correctly displayed in the vehicle at the time the vehicle was parked.

There was no loss to the landowner or anyone else

I believe neither B W Legal or your client have any cause of action to continue this claim against me.

Regards

Jukebox696969

Armtrac auto response..... do i need to provide that level of information??

Thank you for contacting BW Legal.



Your email has been received and will be dealt with as soon as possible.



Before we are able to reply we need you to confirm a few Data Protection Questions which we have specified below.



If your email does not contain the below information, we kindly request you resend your email with the required information to enable us to deal with your query effectively.



BW Legal Reference:

Full Name:

First Line of Address:

Postcode:

Telephone Contact Number:

Authorised Email address:

Confirmation you wish for us to correspond with you via this address (Yes/No):





We make no commitment to response times on this general email account. Therefore, if you consider your matter is urgent, or should you wish to discuss your account with one of our helpful representatives today, you can call our offices on 0113 323 4479 and we will be happy to help.

Please be advised that our standard opening hours are:



Monday - Thursday

8am – 8pm

Friday

8am – 7pm

Saturday

9am – 1pm



Alternatively, you can also manage your account online by utilising our customer portal at https://www.bwlegal.co.uk and clicking on the customer login link to set up your account online. Our Customer Portal provides you with the functionality to speak to us by webchat, raise a query, complete your income and expenditure, make a payment or set up an affordable payment arrangement at your convenience.

BW Legal does not accept service of any court documents at this email address. Service of any court documents can be sent to disputeresolution@bwlegal.co.uk with the name of the court document in the subject header, followed by the parties names [eg: Witness Statement: ABC v XZY].

Redx

NO, this has been covered many times in other threads

you can give your name and address as they have those already, plus your email if you wish (or set up a gmail email address for this purpose only) , plus a picture of your Driving Licence or any similar proof of ID that proves you are you

no phone number (unless you really want to)

seems to me more like a B W LEGAL auto response, not an ARMTRAC response, but the same goes for both, minimum detail under GDPR, ask them to destroy any of this data after processing, like the DVLA proof for example

they should know better under GDPR , asking for extra data is not allowed, just proof that you are you