TPS and BW Legal: LBC

DDWales

Hello all. Have read the newbie threads, parking forums and stickies. Very helpful to see what the current state of play is with PPC's and their legal representatives!


My mother currently has an issue regarding the above...


Background; In summary, she had an letter from BW in April 2019 then a follow up in May claiming that their client, TPS, is chasing an invoice from 2014. This was for an apparent windscreen ticket given for 'driver observed leaving site whilst vehicle remained parked on premises.' This was the first piece of correspondence that she had received from either TPS or BW. At no time was any other letter received prior to this otherwise the matter would have been dealt with earlier. The amount 'owing' contains the usual inflated BW £54 'addition' to bring the grand total to £144.


From reading this forum it seems that a large number people are being chased for old invoices way after the original issue date at present!


TPS haven't managed the car park for at least 3 years and the previous company that employed them have moved out. There were also no ANPR cameras there during 2014 (and still aren't). BW have now issued a LBC.


Actions taken; Web access to the local Council planning portal indicates that no planning permission was given for TPS at any time to erect signage. SAR sent to TPS and returned by them with no original copies of windscreen PCN, no pics of car and no pics of signage included. The SAR response contained screen print outs of the 'alleged' NTK (stated as 'Reminder' and dated 03/11/14 -not even photocopies of originals!) and follow up letter 02/12/14. Will check if NTK/ Reminder is POFA compliant. Will be responding to TPS to ask if they have the former or not. Pics of original signage difficult to obtain otherwise and Google Street view does not enter the car park around 2014.


Contact made with the DVLA in terms of TPS requesting the RK details. Alleged 'offence' was on 1/10/2014. TPS requested details on 30/10/14. Letter also sent to BW to stop processing data. Usual denial given but will write again to them. All copies of letters will be posted here asap.


I can see a few good points in terms of a defence (which will be drafted shortly). Would be grateful if you all could advise on any other courses of action. Have I missed anything? From what I have written above I can see issues for TPS regarding non POFA compliance, lack of original windscreen PCN and pics, plus no planning permission for signage. BW's usual abuse of process with their added £54 will also be noted also of course!


Many thanks in advance,
DDW.

beamerguy

YES .... Abuse of process is currently trending for BWLegal.

They were kicked out of court again for this mal practice

Include your knowledge about their Abuse of Process.

What have they said this time about the fake add-on charge ??

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6014081/abuse-of-process-district-judge-tells-bwlegal

Fruitcake

Personally I would wait for the actual claim before mention the abuse of process add on charge, otherwise they might issue the real thing without it.

Otherwise you seem to have covered the relevant points.
Keep asking questions and building your evidence in readiness.

Even if the landowner has changed since the date of the alleged event, it is worth asking them questions just in case they can provide something helpful.

If the scammers have refused or failed to supply any personal data, complain to the ICO.

DDWales

Thank you bg and Fruitcake.

You'd think they would learn...but obviously not... These responses will be raised and noted before the court!


I am trying to track down the landowner but this is proving difficult- but will persist.


Ok, will hold off for now in terms of abuse of process but will chase in terms of the SAR response.

The_Deep

If they went to court they might struggle.

Few judges regard a leaving site claim is anything more than a trifle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_minimis

It is very difficult to prove and, an MP recently in the H of C ventured the opinion that this might be an infringement of the Human Rights Act. It is, imo, an unfair term in a consumer contract, read this

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/unfair-contract-terms-cma37

and get your MP on board as nine out of ten of these so called breaches of contract are scams

Parliament is well aware of the MO of these private parking companies, and on 15th March 2019 a Bill was enacted to curb the excesses of these shysters. Codes of Practice are being drawn up, an independent appeals service will be set up, and access to the DVLA's date base more rigorously policed, and persistent offenders denied access. Hopefully life will become impossible for the worst of these scammers.

Until this is done you should still complain to your MP, citing the new legislation.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/enacted
V

Fruitcake

Failing all else, you can pay the Land Registry a few quid to find the landowner.

DDWales

Thanks Fruitcake. Will get in touch with Land Registry also!

KeithP

DDWales wrote: »

I am trying to track down the landowner but this is proving difficult- but will persist.

You could try asking the local council who pays the non-domestic rates on the property.

My local council has a spreadsheet on their website listing all premises where NDRs are payable and who pays them.

beamerguy

Fruitcake wrote: »

Personally I would wait for the actual claim before mention the abuse of process add on charge, otherwise they might issue the real thing without it.

Is that not want we want ??? A claim without fakery
They are always going to issue claims

BWLegal and the other cronies already know they take fakery to the courts.

More to the point is, what will be their next little wheeze be to try and scam a court with ???

As said in another post, BWLegal are like a Great White shark attacking people but with a blindfold on

We must feel sorry for the inept parking companies who actually believe in rubbish

beamerguy

DDWales wrote: »

You'd think they would learn...but obviously not... These responses will be raised and noted before the court!

HA, scammers don't learn, there is always the next mug around the corner

The major problem is not BWLegal acting as a bulldozer but more so with the SRA who has failed to protect the public from this predator who fakes claims

DDWales

Hi all.


An update and a possible victory to announce...


In response to clarification with regards to the original SAR which contained scant information, TPS have replied stating that they 'do not have any data such as letters between themselves and BW Legal' apart from a single email (copy was enclosed). They also admit to having no copies of the original windscreen ticket. The letter then goes on to state that due to the age of the debt any images of the 'contravention' are no longer available (they haven't got anything at all have they!) and as such they will 'request that BW Legal cease with any further recovery process.'


Would I be correct in assuming that this closes things...for now at least? Of course, they will be probably attempt to recollect before the 6 years is up but this seems to be a good starter for ten!


Cheers,


DDW