LBC from Gladstones - £680.00

GeorgeB117

Hi guys,

Any help would be greatly appreciated as I don't even know where to start.

Just received an LBC from Gladstones, for £680.00 from charges ranging from 2016-2017 at my university parking & co-op.

Where do I start here? I really don't want to pay £680.00 (obviously), it's unreal how they're asking for this amount.

Many thanks, I look forward to your responses.

Le_Kirk

You start with the NEWBIE thread on the first page of the forum, then post a few more details. Have you received LBC with NO prior warning, no PCN, no NTK?

Egbert_Nobacon

This will not get any help with such lack of detail.
How many PCNs
Details how each occurred
Have any been appealed
This is just for starters, the regulars are good but not mindreaders - help them to help you

The_Deep

The whole industry is a scam, relying on threats of court, and the public's ignorance of the Law, A bill is currently before parliament which will regulate the scammers, many of whom are ex-clampers.

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of alleged contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors. Is has been suggested by an MP that some of these companies may have connections to organised crime.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, (especially Smart}, and others have already been named and shamed in the House of Commons as have Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each week), hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned. They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

The problem has become so widespread that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers.

Sir Greg Knight's Private Members Bill to curb the excesses, and perhaps close down, some of these companies passed its Second Reading in the Lords this month, and, with a fair wind, will l become Law later this year..

All three readings are available to watch on the internet, (some 6-7 hours), and published in Hansard. MPs have an extremely low opinion of the industry. Many are complaining that they are becoming overwhelmed by complaints from members of the public. Add to their burden, complain in the most robust terms about the scammers.

GeorgeB117

Egbert_Nobacon wrote: »

This will not get any help with such lack of detail.
How many PCNs
Details how each occurred
Have any been appealed
This is just for starters, the regulars are good but not mindreaders - help them to help you

Apologies, details:

there are 5no. PCN's, 4 from the university I attendeded and 1 from the co-op I believe. They're all from NPE
They all occurred from 2016-2017, so I don't remember the exact details, but I must have parked there without a permit/ticket. I'm sure the co-op one didn't need a ticket or permit however.
None have been appealed, however this is the first I've heard from them regarding this in over a year, I ignored (stupidly, I know) the letters from NPE with PCNs.

If anybody needs more details I'll be happy to give them, I've started by sending an SAR to NPE, I just need to know where to tell gladstones that I've done so, and what to expect next! Thanks.

Umkomaas

I'm sure the co-op one didn't need a ticket or permit however.

Did you park in a Parent & Child/Disabled Bay?

You need to find out how many times your data was acquired from the DVLA - particularly if they are pursuing Keeper Liability.

You should email the DVLA and ask which organisations (and for what reason) accessed the registered keeper's data from them between a range of dates which includes the date(s) of the parking incident(s). You need to provide the registered keeper's full name and address, the address on the V5C logbook and the Vehicle Registration Mark of the vehicle involved in the parking incident.

SubjectAccess.Requests@dvla.gov.uk

Even though you email your request, the DVLA will respond via Royal Mail.

GeorgeB117

Umkomaas wrote: »

Did you park in a Parent & Child/Disabled Bay?

You need to find out how many times your data was acquired from the DVLA - particularly if they are pursuing Keeper Liability.

You should email the DVLA and ask which organisations (and for what reason) accessed the registered keeper's data from them between a range of dates which includes the date(s) of the parking incident(s). You need to provide the registered keeper's full name and address, the address on the V5C logbook and the Vehicle Registration Mark of the vehicle involved in the parking incident.

SubjectAccess.Requests@dvla.gov.uk

Even though you email your request, the DVLA will respond via Royal Mail.

I honestly cannot remember, I don't believe I would have done so but cannot say with absolute certainty.

I'll do that next, the car in question is no longer mine and was sold over a year ago!

Is there anything else I need to do in the meantime? I'm going to tell Gladstones about the SAR I have sent to NPE.

Umkomaas

I'll do that next, the car in question is no longer mine and was sold over a year ago!

If all the tickets were related to the car whilst it was in your possession, selling it subsequently is irrelevant.

Is there anything else I need to do in the meantime?

The important job is to get confirmation that NPE accessed you data each and every time for each charge.

In parallel get on with your preparation for dealing with court proceedings. With 5 tickets, a court case (or even 5 cases) is almost inevitable. Your preparation can be undertaken by thoroughly reading and digesting the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, post #2 which covers all aspects of small claims court proceedings.

Coupon-mad

If this is the Co-op at Earlham, search the forum to read all the other cases and what a scam site this is, even known to local Councillors/the press.

GeorgeB117

Hi guys,

This is the letter I received back from Gladstones.

Request for Restriction of Processing of Data
We refer to your request regarding the restriction of processing of data.
Unfortunately we cannot process your request because we can demonstrate compelling
legitimate grounds for the processing of your data which override the interests, rights and
freedoms of you as an individual. That legitimate interest being that we are acting on behalf
of our client for the recovery of monies relating to an unpaid Parking Charge Notice.
To process your data is necessary and lawful, as it is required in furtherance of our client’s
instructions, and we act for them on their rights and obligations for the recovery of such
monies.
We will however extend the Pre Action Protocol period by 30 days to 1 st March 2019. Please
pay or reply by that date. Any reply received outside of the 30 day period may not be
considered as legal proceedings are likely to have been issued
If you are not satisfied with our decision, you have a right to complain to a supervisory
authority. At this stage you should contact the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) at
Wycliffe, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, SK9 5AF (Telephone 0303 123 1113).!
Please note that time limits may apply and so you should contact the ICO as soon as ever
possible following our review decision.
We must also advise you that you also have the right to a judicial remedy (i.e. claim
compensation through the courts), if you remain unsatisfied with the outcome of a complaint
to the supervisory authority and you believe there has been a breach of the General Data
Protection Regulation 2018. The ICO cannot award compensation and so if you cannot
reach an agreement with us on the amount of compensation where appropriate, you can
apply to court. You should seek independent advice at any stage that you feel it necessary.

nosferatu1001

Did you search for that exact letter? Its their template response

So you just respond back stating they have no immediate need to process your data, as they have X years of the 6 years allowed under the Limitations Act to start proceedings. To start proceedings before the SAR is responded to is premature and prima facie unreasonable behaviour, for which you claim your full costs on the indemnity basis.