Help! PPC threatening court action!

Dragonfly22

Anyone able to help at all?

beamerguy

Dragonfly22 wrote: »

Hi all, just a quick update.

We sent a SAR to the PPC which we received a reply to after a couple of days. It is now approaching 30 days since we sent the SAR and I was advised in a previous post that I could, at this point, ask Gladstones for information such as records from the PDT machines and close ups of any signs at the car park. Would it be a good idea to request this information now? I'm asking this because we have still not received the 'proper' letter of claim so we have not had any direct correspondence from Gladstones. Would it be better to wait for the real letter? Also, when should we send a letter to them to request a restriction on data processing?
Thanks in advance

ha, the incompetent Gladstones strike again

You wait until you receive a REAL letter before claim which must include their proof and proof of costs plus give you 30 days to respond. It will also include forms which you ignore

The PPC has left themselves open for you to complain to the ICO

Coupon-mad

I wasn't telling you to just ask for info, I suggested a stronger reply telling them about the machines. By closing up the payment slot, if there was no other payment method available then it can be argued that any contract base on an obligation to pay a tariff was void and you should tell Gladstones that, at LBC stage, so you can later show the Judge how reasonable you were in trying to resolve a dispute and prevent wasting court time & your costs, over a claim with no merit.

we have still not received the 'proper' letter of claim so we have not had any direct correspondence from Gladstones. Would it be better to wait for the real letter?

If what you have is only a 14 days/debt letter from Gs then wait for the real LBC.

Dragonfly22

Right, so I wait for the real LBC then write to Gladstones about the faulty payment machine and request additional information.

Coupon-mad wrote: »

By closing up the payment slot, if there was no other payment method available then it can be argued that any contract base on an obligation to pay a tariff was void and you should tell Gladstones that

This might pose a problem. In their reply to my SAR they provided photos which show signage indicating you can make payment online. The sign was on a far wall, very small and not visible from where I was parked. The fact that I have used this car park multiple times and never noticed the signage goes to show how insufficient it was. I have also been to other car parks where the pay machine has stickers informing you of alternative forms of payment but this one only has the tariff and then graffiti all over it as well as a message saying it does not accept the new pound coin. Would I now be arguing not only about the faulty machine but the insufficient signage too in my reply to Gladstones when the real LBC comes through? Or is that something I should save for later?
Thanks in advance

Le_Kirk

Dragonfly22 wrote: »

This might pose a problem. In their reply to my SAR they provided photos which show signage indicating you can make payment online.

....... and of course, everyone carries a Smart phone with Wi-Fi access and/or a contract that allows data access so you can pay on-line! I would call this frustration of contract.

Dragonfly22

Hi all,
So I have finally received a 'letter before claim' from Gladstones Solicitors acting on behalf of EPS.
It gives me 30 days to pay or to reply to the letter and states that 'a version of the Information Sheet and Reply Form taken from the PAP can be completed on our website' so I am certain it is a proper LBC.



I understand the newbies thread states that I should send a SAR to EPS at this stage but I have already done this back when they sent me the 'letter before action.'


I was advised previously that I could now write a letter to Gladstones so I will begin doing that. I will mention the faulty payment machines and the contract being void as well as requesting a map of the signage. Is there any use requesting the receipts from the pay and display machine? It will show the machine was not working and no payments being made but I do have photographic evidence of this anyway.


Please could I get some pointers as to what else I should mention. They are requesting [FONT=&quot]£480 for 3 PCN's. [/FONT]Any help would be greatly appreciated.[FONT=&quot][/FONT]

Coupon-mad

I was advised previously that I could now write a letter to Gladstones so I will begin doing that. I will mention the faulty payment machines and the contract being void as well as requesting a map of the signage. Is there any use requesting the receipts from the pay and display machine? It will show the machine was not working and no payments being made but I do have photographic evidence of this anyway.

Yes, do all of that, as it looks reasonable to your Judge later that you tried to engage and narrow the issues to resolve the dispute without court.

Add that any debt is denied but that 3 x £100 is only £300 as the considered sum potentially able to be sought (plus court fees) and that the added 'damages or indemnity costs' of £60 per PCN, and the imaginary '£50 legal costs' are pie in the sky for a private parking scam roboclaim handled by clerical staff.

Such an artificially greedy inflated parking claim constitutes an abuse of process and runs contrary to the findings and considered sum in ParkingEye v Beavis, as they well know.

Call it out as the scam that it is. Shows them you are aware of the whole con.

Dragonfly22

Hi all,

I have drafted a reply to the letter before claim using bits and bobs from templates I have found on the site. There isn't much use in posting this as I'm sure you've all seen it before. However, I have added in my own bits in relation to my own situation which I will include in the beginning of the letter.

Can I get some feedback on this please? Any help will be much appreciated.



Dear Sirs,

I am in receipt of your Letter Before Claim on xx/xx/xx.


Firstly, I would like to mention my astonishment that your client wishes to begin proceedings with a case that has no merits and will only be a waste of the courts’ time. I have sufficient photographic evidence to show the payment machines at the car park were faulty, not only that, but I have videos showing when I tried to insert coins into the machine the payment slot closed up making it impossible for me to comply with payment. Therefore, any contract based on an obligation to pay a tariff is void.


May I also make you aware that your client had got rid of the payment machine altogether on one of the days (again, I have photographic evidence of this) which only emphasises the fact that the machine was out of order. The onus is on your client to make sure it was in good working order so that customers could comply with payment.


Furthermore, I am well aware that signage in the car park has been deliberately inadequate in order to trick other customers like myself that there is no other means to make payment and leading to many others falling prey to this scam. I have been to multiple other car parks which make it clear to customers on the machine itself about alternative forms of payment if the machine is faulty which your client failed to do.



I have also been back to the car park and I have seen your client has made attempts to add new signage which I will not hesitate to compare with the signage there at the time of the ‘alleged’ contravention if it comes to a court hearing. It is clear to me that your client must have done this being well aware that their signage was seriously inadequate, illegible and obscured.


I would also like to mention that any debt your client claims I owe them is denied but that 3 x £100 is only £300 as the considered sum potentially able to be sought (plus court fees) and that the added costs of £60 per PCN constitute an abuse of process and runs contrary to the findings and considered sum in ParkingEye v Beavis, as you may well know.

Coupon-mad

It will do and will look reasonable later in court!

It will get a daft and dismissive template reply. Then a claim at Christmas anyway.

Dragonfly22

Thank you for looking over it Coupon Mad. As always, your help is greatly appreciated.



I do have a couple of questions before I send it off:


1. If the driver wishes to defend the case at what point should, or can, the RK disclose their details? Will this affect the merits of their case?



2. The LBC only mentioned 3 PCN's when a total of 4 have been received . Do you think they will try to bring the other one as a separate claim and therefore waste the courts time further? Should this be mentioned in our reply to them?


3. Is sending our reply via letter using a 1st class stamp the usual and most appropriate method for replying to a LBC?