PCN - Court Considerations

derekthedog

Hello everyone - first off thank you all for putting together such a comprehensive store of information, it's been really useful.

Just a handful of questions that I'd really appreciate some help with as letters have been received from good old Debt Recovery Plus for two overstay instances at a car park, where the early documentation had been sent to an old address due to an out of date V5 (which has been since updated).

The person concerned accepts the need for car park management and reasonable deterrents, but is not happy with being hit by a bill for 2 x £150 straight off with minimal substantiating evidence and minimal effort from the car park operator.

i) If court were to become a possibility, would there be two separate hearings to cover the two contraventions, or would the two cases be consolidated to minimise expense?

ii) What sort of costs should reasonably be expected for a court attendance?

iii) The driver accepts that the overstays occurred, but is resistant to paying the full amount because it seems unjustified. However research on here suggests that that is not exactly a good defence in court? Would that be mitigated by taking into account:

iv) The person concerned has already sent a covering letter enclosing a cheque to ECP for £100 to cover the amounts that would have been paid if the first letters had been received, but expects to be rejected.

iv) If the early PCN documents had been sent by Euro Car Parks to an old address, is there any way of resetting the clock in a manner that the operator cannot refuse, as paying 2 x £50, which while annoying, would be preferable to all of this hassle.

Thanks for taking a look and if you can help :beer:

nosferatu1001

1) THey make more money by filing two claims, as they add on fake additional costs. So IF it happens tehn its likely two claims. You can request the court strikes the second claim as abuse of process, or as last resort amalgamate, but you cannto force this.
2) £25 to file a claim, £50 "filing costs" IF they used a solicitor, £25 hearing, plus a bit of interest. £200 per claim is usual. Unless you behave unreasonably, nothing more.
3) Accepting a debt is owed by not agreeing with teh amount is problematic as a defence, and you will have seen not really one that is used.

4) Wow its ECP? They dont do court
so its two £50 PCN? Was it marked IN FULL AND FINAL SETTLEMENT?

This does help - if they reject it then you can suggest any court action (whcih wont happen) should be limited in costs etc as they had a good offer already
5) (You had two 4s. just use numerals, its easier than roman form) No, there is absolutely no way for you to force them to do anything

LOoks, its an unregulated industry, so the only "rules" are those of contract law. Its all based in contract law. They send invoices out disguised as official sounding documents but theyre only invoices.

derekthedog

Thank you for the response that's potentially really useful for my stress cost/benefit calculations

However, there may be some good news already: I contacted the landowner in parallel and they may be able to help. It's not finalised yet, but fingers crossed these claims will be cancelled. Faith in humanity restored.

The_Deep

The person concerned accepts the need for car park management and reasonable deterrents,

Up to a point, but is entering a wrong VRN on an unfamiliar keybord a genuine BOC? Is parking a few inches over a line in order to get out one? How about a fluttering ticket?

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 five readings are available to watch on the internet, (some 7-8 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.