BW Legal / Britannia

Tickedoff1

Hello I wondered if any body can advise?

Parking ticket was received from Army & Navy Chelmsford regarding 8th July 2017.

We have logged onto MCOL and completed the acknowledgement of service. Denied the debt, but not contested jurisdiction. Also contacted Britania Parking for all data held on the registered keeper.

Received the Data info back today including NTK dated 13th July and photos of the car being in the car park (according to them leaving and entering) , and a paragraph about adding "You are also liable for the £60 instructions fee as your file has been passed to debt recovery"

Can anyone advise on the best defence going forward? The registered keeper was not driving at the time but has left it very late to do much at all as the defence needs to be submitted now. So there may be no option other than to pay up.

Regarding the fact that the keeper wasn't driving, there is a section on the form that says to fill that in if they weren't, if we did that would the driver at the time be granted a lesser amount to pay?

Sorry for all the questions

Many Thanks

Umkomaas

BRITANNIA / BWL CASES

As you will see from the first few pages of the forum, there is an onslaught by BWL on behalf of Britannia (and a few other hitherto court-shy PPCs) which is being conducted on an industrial scale - roboclaims.

You are caught in a one-way traffic flow where you must fight or pay - there is no longer a safe 'do nothing' option.

1. Pay now, it costs you exactly what they are currently demanding.
2. Ignore it, a 'judgment in default' will inevitably follow for at least what they want - maybe with even more costs added; continue to ignore that, you're getting a CCJ with credit trashing consequences for 6 years.
3. Defend, yet lose in court, the cost award is likely to be noticeably less than their current demand ~£175.
4. Defend, and win in court, you owe them nothing and you could claim up to £95 for half a day's pay/loss of annual leave, plus travel costs @45p per mile, plus your parking cost for the day.

Your least costly option has to be 3, with hopefully a win as per 4.

But BWL/Britannia cannot physically take everyone to court, and there is evidence to show that with a well constructed defence, BWL can come along with a reduced 'offer to settle', which if refused, becomes a discontinuation. We can't give you guarantees on that, but as you have little choice other than to defend (if you don't want to pay), you need to give this your very best shot.

Whether you have a good defendable case to argue, you will need to read other similar cases at the defence (or beyond) stage and learn from those.

As above, it's flight (pay up, and through the nose), or fight (research and defend). No completed court cases have yet emerged at the end of this particular sausage machine, but some are in the process of defence drafting.

Do a forum search on keywords Britannia BWL Defence and read those developing defences. We don't have any silver bullets for you unfortunately.

HOW TO USE THE FORUM SEARCH FUNCTION:

Hit your 'Back' button to get back to the forum thread list. On the bar just above the threads you'll see the 'Search' function. Click on the 'Advanced Search' button and on the following page place your keyword(s) in the 'Search By Keyword(s)' and make sure the 'Show Results As' button (at the foot of the window) is changed from 'Threads' to 'Posts'.

beamerguy

Guess the claim was from their dodgy legal BWLegal ???

"You are also liable for the £60 instructions fee as your file has been passed to debt recovery"

Have you gone back to check the signs and taken pictures.
In particular do the signs state the above

This £60 scam is not approved by the courts and they give different reasons for the £60

In your case they are saying instructing a debt collector ?
This jolly little duo also quote "contractual fees", "legal fees", solicitors costs" .
The signs must clearly show what a motorist can expect, not words hidden in tiny terms and conditions

BWLEGAL ADD ON A FAKE £60 ?
In addition to the 'parking charge', the Claimant's legal representatives, BWLegal, have artificially inflated the value of the Claim by adding costs of £60 which has not actually been incurred by the Claimant, and which are artificially invented figures in an attempt to circumvent the Small Claims costs rules using double recovery. >>>> thanks to bargepole

READ UP ON BWLEGAL HERE
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5672664/bwlegal-the-list-of-failures-growing

Have you gone back to the retailer pointing out that by shopping with them, customers risk being taken to court ? This is the job for their CEO

So, their claim which sounds like ANPR. what are they actually claiming for and what are the times they are stating

The_Deep

there may be no option other than to pay up.

Why would you pay a scammer?

"You are also liable for the £60 instructions fee as your file has been passed to debt recovery"

AFAIAA DCAs work on a commission basis, the PPC will not have paid this amount, ask them for a v.a.t. invoice.

Complain to your MP as 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 become so widespread that MPs agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Hopefully, this will become law by Easter .

Redx

read all the other B W LEGAL - BRITANNIA court case threads to see what their defence looks like

also read post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread carefully , reading the example defences, and starting with the concise defence by member BARGEPOLE

post the DATE OF ISSUE on that N1 below as well


post your proposed draft defence once you have completed it, like the NEWBIES thread tells you to do

KeithP

What is the Issue Date on your Claim Form?

Coupon-mad

The problem become so widespread that MPs agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Hopefully, this will become law by Easter.

But the Code of Practice & appeals system it enables wont be created for many months.