Without Prejudice Offer Rejected. What Now?

Le_Kirk

You submit a SAR. Go HERE to learn all about it and scroll down until you see this: -

If you have a real 'Letter of claim' or Letter Before Claim (LBC), a claim IS likely. I don't mean one asking you to pay a debt collector, I mean a 'real' LBC like here, which you can tell due to the 30 day deadline and mention of reply forms:

If you are going to defend the claim, you need to know what they are claiming against you!

ImNoExpert

Did you receive these six parking charge notice's on your car windscreen, or via letters in the post? Did you tell them you were the driver and give them your address, or did they find all this out from the DVLA?

If they don't know who the driver is, they need to us POFA12 (Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 - Schedule 4) for each ticket individually, and so need to make six separate requests to the DVLA for the registered keepers details. If they have only requested the registered keepers details once, but then used these details for all six tickets, you could argue that at least five of them are invalid as they have not correctly transferred liability from the driver to the registered keeper for each ticket correctly.

Also, if you have identified yourself as the driver for, say, the first ticket only, but not the rest, then again this means they would need to use POFA12 for the other five.

If you send an email to SubjectAccess.Requests@dvla.gov.uk with your car registration, you can ask them who has accessed the DVLA database for your details, and this would confirm if SIP have made six separate requests, or just the one.

If you have already identified yourself as the driver for each ticket, then they won't need to use POFA12, sorry.

Snakes_Belly

What are the chances of you being able to pay the claim if it goes to court and they add on court fees? Have you any other debts?

judrop500

Thanks @Le_Kirk and @Imnoexpert very useful advice.

@Snakes I have £2000 on a credit card and a Student Loan. I imagine court costs would by over £1,000 but I think i read that if you make a WP offer the judge is more leniant on costs etc.?

ImNoExpert

I expect SIP have added the "court costs" to each ticket in to this, but then will only issue a single claim, so make sure to argue that if it goes to court, saying they are trying to add, say, "£50" court costs per ticket when in fact they are only bringing a single claim.

Your court costs, if you lost, would not be anywhere near the £1000 mark.

judrop500

Sorry I meant if I lost I’d have to pay over £1000 in charges and costs combined, given SIP is demanding £960.

I hav emailed the DVLA and I will submit a SAR and then I will consider my options I think....

Coupon-mad

judrop500 wrote: »

Sorry I meant if I lost I’d have to pay over £1000 in charges and costs combined, given SIP is demanding £960.

No, you wouldn't. I'd be astonished of 6 PCNs went against you that high.

It seems to me you are in Manchester, therefore you have some of the most anti-PPC Judges there. So that's worth considering.

You could always opt for the case to be heard on the papers so you don't have to discuss the circumstances in person, and make a decent fist of a defence and the a WS that puts the Claimant to prove their case:

- proving no payment was made on each occasion, and
- that the Defendant was driving every time, or full compliance with the POFA every time
- and that there was 'adequate notice' of the 'parking charge', not just a signs with the tariffs in large letters and the penalty in small print, and a dark, unsignposted PDT machine in a dark corner
- and that there was a 'relevant contract or relevant obligation',
- and that the claimant has standing to sue in their own name,
- and that there is a legitimate interest in pursuing a sum far in excess of any tariff, given that the Beavis case stated that the usual penalty rule would apply to cases with a quantifiable sum/loss (such as in a PDT machine car park)
- and pointing out that the added 'costs' (apart from the court fees) must be struck out as they've never been incurred in truth, there are no costs attributable for debt collection letters sent free by such firms, and the Beavis case confirmed that a parking firm not in possession cannot base a claim on damages. Even if the court decides they can, then the 'damages' are the tariffs, if the Claimant proves their case for each and every PCN.

judrop500

@Coupon-mad appreciate this - really helpful thank you

judrop500

I just checked the land registry and SIP don’t own the land. Does this make a difference?

The_Deep

PPCs rarely own land, in the case of Beavis v PE they were paying the landowner, a pension fund £1,000 a week to "farm" it.

Sips current assets would not be enough to buy them a mid-terrace house in a rough part of Slough.

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/06752126/filing-history