BWLegal Letter – Premier Park

viper1984

Hi

I am seeking help and advice for my mother, and for myself as I am helping her.

I have started this thread as I received a PCN myself a few months after my mother received hers. I read the information on this forum, then sought and took advice, and won at POPLA.

My mother received the below letter from BWLegal on 12/04/2019. I believe the next steps are to send a SAR via email to Premier Park, AND to send a request for the restriction of data processing and that the case should be put 'on hold' via email to BWLegal.

I should also add that upon receiving the letter my mother phoned and spoke to BWLegal and then sent them an email containing photo evidence of; her parking space with car and garage included, letter confirming exchange of contracts had taken place when buying her flat, cheque stumps, her original letter sent to Premier Park in 2015. She did not receive a reply email other than a generic ‘we have received your email’.

Timeline/Brief summary of actions up to this point – happy to give more detail if required
Mother received PCN for ‘Invalid Permit’ 22/01/15. She did not have permit displayed. She was parked in her parking space in front of her garage at the block of flats she lives in. She owns the flat, does not rent.
She wrote to Premier Park by hand, was told PCN still applied.
Appealed to POPLA. POPLA appeal rejected.
'Offer to settle to avoid court proceedings’ letter received from Premier Park 26/09/16. Letter stated £100 payment must be made by 03/10/16.
Cheque dated 26/09/16 for £60 sent to Premier Park. Rejection letter received as it was not the full £100 now requested.
Cheque dated 17/10/16 for £100 sent to Premier Park. Letter received 19/10/16 from Premier Park rejecting payment as has been passed to debt collectors agency.
Received below letter from BWLegal 12/04/19.
Phoned BWlegal and sent email containing photo evidence.

I have tried to keep this as brief as possible, but if any further information will help to give advice, please ask and I will get it for you.

I would like to thank anyone who offers their help and advice in advance. I will update this thread step by step in the hope it can help someone else in future.

Can anyone confirm for that that these are the correct steps to take for now please?
1. Send a SAR request via email to Premier Park
2. Send a request for the restriction of data processing and that the case should be put 'on hold' via email to BWLegal.

Redx

1) correct , with a scan or pic of either the V5C doc OR a scan or pic of the form you showed, as proof of ID


2) correct , add a scan of that letter as proof of ID of the person sending it too

Coupon-mad

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/75741921#Comment_75741921

Thanks to Umkomaas for that thorough summary.

viper1984

The SAR Request email has been sent to Premier Park, and the email notifying BWLegal also sent.

I have just noticed the BWLegal letter has the vehicle registration incorrect (1 character wrong). Does this have any implications for either party? Should we notify BWLegal of their error?

Coupon-mad

That's a typo - so no and no.

viper1984

We have had a couple of letters through from BW Legal...

The first is BW Legal rejecting the restriction of data processing as expected. I believe no further action needed on this.

Second is the Letter of Claim from BW Legal.

Can anyone confirm my understanding of the situation is correct please? No response needs to be sent to the Letter of Claim from BW Legal, and we just await the County Court claim to come through the post. And while waiting for the County Court claim, I should start to prepare the defence.

Not had the SAR information back from Premier Park yet, but it has only been a week since it was sent to them.

Thank you in advance for your help.

[/url]

[/url]

Coupon-mad

I would always respond to a LBC. How about:

Dear Sirs,

Your client: Premier Park / account number xxxxxxx / VRN xxx xxxx

I see you are continuing to bombard me with letters whilst I am awaiting a SAR from your client. Since you asked, your position is not satisfactory, and I do not have 'an account' with your or your client.

Any debt is denied but I am seeking debt advice from a reputable online source. As such, in accordance with the PAP for Debt Claims, you must now put the matter on hold for at least 30 days from receipt of this communication.

At least that will give me the chance to also receive and review the data that your client deigns to produce at long last, none of which accompanied your template 'Letter of Claim'.

I realise that personal data does not include a copy of the signage that your client purports bound me to a contract. I now request this yet again, and require that you supply all signage photographs that your client intends to rely upon, after the 30 day period and certainly before commencing court action.

Estimated Claim
This is a baseless claim and pure harassment of a resident of a property with title, unlike any parking firm third party. I suggest you read my previous email containing photo evidence of:
- my parking space with car and garage included, and
- a letter re exchange of contracts and payments when buying this flat, and
- my original letter sent to Premier Park in 2015, when they should have cancelled the charge.

The estimated claim is alarmist, intimidating and contains a substantial charge additional to the parking charge, which was not £160 and is in any event, denied in its entirety.

An additional charge - variously described as 'initial legal costs' or 'debt collection' is not recoverable under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4, nor with reference to the judgment in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 where only £85 was recovered and it was held that such a case cannot be pleaded in damages.

In addition, whilst the CPRs allow interest to be claimed, it is unreasonable to attempt to claim interest where the time that has passed is wholly due to your client's own inaction. It is an abuse of process for a Claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for additional sums which it is not entitled to recover and the court will be invited to strike out the claim.

Further, CPR 44.3 (2) states:
''Where the amount of costs is to be assessed on the standard basis, the court will:
(a) only allow costs which are proportionate to the matters in issue. Costs which are disproportionate in amount may be disallowed or reduced even if they were reasonably or necessarily incurred; and
(b) resolve any doubt which it may have as to whether costs were reasonably and proportionately incurred or were reasonable and proportionate in amount in favour of the paying party.


What you need to do now
(a) Advise your client to cancel this meritless proposed claim to avoid wasted legal action.

(b) Given that I have duly informed you that the debt is disputed and I am seeking debt advice from a reputable online source, in accordance with the FCA rules and PAP for Debt Claims you must now put the matter on hold for at least 30 days from receipt of this communication.

(c) Once the 30 day period has passed you must comply with the PAP for debt claims and supply me with the requested information that does not fall under the SAR, namely all photographs taken on the material date, showing the signage terms. This must be supplied in advance of any claim in order to comply with the PAP especially given the fact that I have fully complied and shown the evidence that I own the flat and demised parking space and garage as set out in my lease.

For the avoidance of doubt, I have never have, and never would, contract with any parking firm to allow them to operate their ''outrageous scam'' (Hansard 2.2.18) of marauding around near my property and trespassing on my demised land, harassing me/my visitors with demands for money.

Further, my lease does not give any standing to a third party such as your client, who is not in possession. Premier Park was never a party to my lease and seems to have failed to even carry out the basic checks and balances that a reasonable person would expect to be done to protect the existing easements, rights and interests of the residents by exempting them and their allocated parking spaces from enforcement, before blighting the estate with an unwanted and unsolicited regime.


My address for service is:

xxxxxx

I trust this is satisfactory and clarifies my position.

yours faithfully,

viper1984

Thank you Coupon-mad

That is above and beyond the help I had expected, really kind of you. It is much appreciated, especially as you included all the information specific to my mother.

I will add the relevant information and ensure she sends out the email. Thanks again, will update next time I hear anything.

Coupon-mad

I've edited it a bit, added more.

Mark2spark

It's the 'What you must do now' that C-M has edited Viper in case you don't spot it

viper1984

Okay, just to keep the thread updated. Since my last post we have had a letter from BW Legal through the post, and the SAR request from Premier Park.

The BW Legal letter was dated 16/05/19 and was basically saying the request for to restrict processing has been rejected. Let me know if I need to go into any further detail and I will do.

The SAR from Premier Park dated 10/05/16 contained..
- Premier Park's notes on the case
- Original PCN
- Photo's of car, and space parked in
- Emails from us/my mother to Premier Park
- Letters from Premier Park sent to my mother
- POPLA case with evidence submitted

I think we are now just waiting for the County Court Claim Form to come through the post. Then it will be time to start preparing the defence.

One question I have is what weight does the POPLA case hold in the County Court?