BW Legal - Notice of County Court Claim issued for £265.70

SWB

Okay so it looks like BW Legal are being kind enough to give us another two weeks to pay their charges
This mornings letter (shortened):
On ** July, a CCC was issued against you. We have received your response. We are going to proceed to court. We are confident the court will find in our favour and if successful, a CCJ may be issued against you. We hope this is not necessary so pay £270 within 2 weeks to prevent this....
See you in court BW Legal

beamerguy

SWB wrote: »

Okay so it looks like BW Legal are being kind enough to give us another two weeks to pay their charges
This mornings letter (shortened):
On ** July, a CCC was issued against you. We have received your response. We are going to proceed to court. We are confident the court will find it our favour and if successful, a CCJ may be issued against you. We hope this is not necessary so pay £270 within 2 weeks to prevent this....
See you in court BW Legal

Such arrogance ??

We are confident the court will find it our favour

Don't bank on it BWL, especially attempting to scam people by adding £60 which is ABUSE OF PROCESS..

What part of the law do BWLEGAL NOT UNDERSTAND ??

This additional charge is not recoverable under the protection of freedoms act 2012, Schedule 4

SWB

Well, we are at the Witness Statement stage.
Letter received from the Court this morning with a Court Date for February.
I initially thought that POFA had been correctly followed by PP but on further investigation, it appears not. Will I be able to mention that somewhere in my Witness Statement?
Many thanks for any help.

Redx

yes , use anything you should have known or found out , before the defence , during and since, especially if its already in evidence or will be in evidence

so if they failed POFA , if the dfriver has not been revealed , use POFA in your WS + Exhibits , plus dont forget your costs schedule

also read the thread by CEC16 where coupon-mad has the CRA 2015, add abuse of process as an extra WS exhibit and mention it in your WS

SWB

Happy New year everyone

I wonder if someone would be kind enough to confirm that this wording the original letter fails POFA please?

The exact wording on the letter is:
We now request this amount is paid using one of the payment methods described overleaf. If within 28 days we have nor received full payment or driver details, under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act, we have the right, subject to the requirements of the Act, to recover the parking charge amount that remains unpaid from the keeper of the vehicle.

Thank you so much for any input

Coupon-mad

If within 28 days we have nor received full payment or driver details,

That wording from Premier Park, has been held by POPLA not to be compliant.

Search the POPLA DECISIONS thread itself for Premier POFA as your keywords, and look for POPLA decisions about them, made in the same year as the parking event.

You WILL find a POPLA decision to support your exact case on that point. Are you sytill working on your WS and evidence, if so you also need a costs schedule and SUPPLEMENTARY WITNESS STATEMENT about the falsely added £60 with the case law that goes with it, and a copy of the Warwick decision against Premier Park, posted by 'Jon' someone(!) in December.

Easy to find by using Warwick Premier as your keywords.

If you missed reading CEC16's thread you need to read it.

beamerguy

BWLegal spanked in Warwick for ABUSE OF PROCESS
Deputy District Judge Josephs
CLAIM NUMBER: F5DP2D6Y dated 6th Dec 2019
CLAIM STRUCK OUT: REASON: ABUSE OF PROCESS
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6079858/bw-legal-premier-park-thanks-for-all-your-help

CEC16's
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/75917866#Comment_75917866

SWB

In what format would a registered keeper write the Witness Statement if he wasn't driving the car please?
A reminder:
NTK in May 2015
I dont believe the POFA wording was legal.
Driver was actually sat in car awaiting elderly relative and car was not actually left.
There is no contract between landowner and Premier Park (as proven in previous Court Case for same Car Park and time period).
Signage inadequate in both number and size of signs
No Planning Permission for the business
'Exceeded maximum stay period'

Thanks for any help.

beamerguy

SWB wrote: »

A reminder:
NTK in May 2015
I dont believe the POFA wording was legal.
Driver was actually sat in car awaiting elderly relative and car was not actually left.
There is no contract between landowner and Premier Park (as proven in previous Court Case for same Car Park and time period).
Signage inadequate in both number and size of signs
No Planning Permission for the business
'Exceeded maximum stay period'

Thanks for any help.

So, I am the judge asking questions ....
1: Why don't you think that POFA wording was not legal
2: Why do you think there is no contract
3: Why do you think there is no planning permission

SWB

beamerguy wrote: »

So, I am the judge asking questions ....
1: Why don't you think that POFA wording was not legal
2: Why do you think there is no contract
3: Why do you think there is no planning permission

Thanks Beamerguy but that was only written as a reminder so someone didn't have to trawl through the whole thread.

If someone could help with the 'In what format would a registered keeper write the Witness Statement if he wasn't driving the car please?' it would be really appreciated.