Bw legal letter of claim

reg76

Have at it 

____________________

DEFENCE

____________________

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question but

liability is denied. The defendant was also the driver of the vehicle in question.

3. There were no marked signs at the entrance to the car park. There was a reflective sign

placed in a dangerous location on a tight bend inside the carpark which could only be observed

by taking the drivers concentration away from negotiating said bend {this was reported to the

claimant at the time and ignored}

The signs were poorly placed being too high to read from a vehicle and with vague small print

On the signs it stated that the car park was regularly patrolled, this is not correct as the claimant

relies solely on the two ANPR cameras at the entrance/exit of the car park. There is not nor has

there ever been to the defendant's knowledge any uniformed member of TPS staff conducting

car park duties as per the information on the signs including the monitoring of disabled bays,

vehicles parked over lines and drivers leaving the site

TPS only chases those people they catch out on the remotely operated cameras

The vehicle in question was alleged to have overstayed by 12 minutes however the cameras only

note the arrival and exit times and not the time parked. The car park is regularly busy and it often

takes time to exit. Having explained this to the claimant I received a letter stating that as the

vehicle in question left the car park during weekday “out of rush hour” they found it “hard to

believe” the delays mentioned even though they had never sent anyone to conduct an inspection

visit.

Since February 2019 up until august 2019 I received numerous emails and letters threatening

and harassing me for this non-existent parking charge. TPS and BW legal have tried numerous

times to obtain personal information such as my phone number under the guise of “data

protection” even going so far as threatening to mention my reluctance to provide my personal

data to a judge.

I received a letter of claim dated August 16 2019 for £124.00 informing me that should I not

respond by 20 September 2019 they were to issue a claim against me in county court “without

further notice”. I immediately responded stating my wish to defend this spurious claim at my local

court. My response was ignored and I received no further contact from BW Legal until a letter

dated 16 April 2020 stating “good news 20% discount offer” due to the Covid19 pandemic.

I responded with utter disgust and was then ignored again until I received an identical letter of

claim to the first one only this time more money had been added on and it was dated 20 August

2020.

Once again, I responded with my wish to defend in court. I then received no contact at all until a

third letter of claim arrived dated 20 September 2021 once again identical to the ones before only

this time for even more money.

The first letter of claim demanded the sum of £201.73

The second letter of claim demanded £207.50

The third letter f claim demanded £234.63

I have responded to all correspondence and emails and have been met with threats, harassment

and misinformation all to extract as much money from me as possible

I have complained to the relevant bodies about both TPS and BW Legal and also asked my local

MP to investigate.

I have attempted to contact the land owner however it appears to be an offshore holding

company and as yet TPS have neglected to inform me who has contracted them to monitor the

car park in question.

Finally, I received a claim and after filing my acknowledgement of service I received a further

letter from BW Legal telling me it's not too late and I can settle out of court.

Since February 2019 I have been harassed for utterly ridiculous sums of money and it has

placed a great deal of stress on myself and my family suffering the threat of court action three

times only for the claimant to do absolutely nothing on two of those occasions

Redx

2) should say keeper and driver , ! lose the second sentence

3) is too long , save the stories for the witness , keep it concise , to the point , legal arguments

I is not used in a defence , so it's , the defendant ( as in the entity , claimant and defendant , no I etc )

Rejig and repost

Coupon-mad

This (below) is about the only part on your draft #3 that's worth keeping in the defence.  The rest can be part of your WS later on.

Add to this a sentence about grace periods not being applied before and after the period of parking (reference the relevant version of the Code of Practice from the year of parking event and state that the Claimant failed to comply). 

The vehicle in question was alleged to have overstayed by 12 minutes however the cameras only note the arrival and exit times and not the time parked. The car park is regularly busy and it often takes time to exit.

reg76

Okeydoke how's this? 

____________________

DEFENCE

____________________

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in

question but liability is denied.

3. The vehicle in question was alleged to have overstayed by 12 minutes however the cameras only

note the arrival and exit times and not the time parked. The car park is regularly busy.
No grace period has been allowed for the defendant to leave the parking bay and exit the car park 

BPA code of practice January 2018
13.4 " You should allow the driver a reasonable period to leave the private car park after the parking contract has ended before you take enforcement action. If the location is one where parking is normally permitted the grace period at the end of the parking period should be a minimum of 10 minutes. 

Coupon-mad

What about consideration period at the start?

That BPA CoP had something about that grace period, too: a reasonable time at arrive, drive round and park, read the terms and decide whether to stay or go.

reg76

There was something about that in the document, shall I add that then post the defence? 

Fruitcake

You should include everything in your defence that helps you so you can then expand on it at the WS/exhibits stage.

If the CoP mentions a consideration period before the parking period begins, and a grace period afterwards, then you should definitely include both parts as well as stating that ANPR doesn't record parking time, but records the time on site plus the time it takes to get from the entrance to a parking space, and from a parking space to the exit.

This is one of the reasons why the UK Government prohibits the use of ANPR cameras in council and local authority car parks.

reg76

OK I'm hoping this should do it, thanks once again for the guidance

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in

question but liability is denied.

3. The vehicle in question was alleged to have overstayed by 12 minutes however the cameras only

note the arrival and exit times and not the time parked. The car park is regularly busy.
No grace period has been allowed for the defendant to leave the parking bay and exit the car park 

BPA code of practice January 2018
31.2, if the parking location is one where parking is normally permitted you most allow the driver  a reasonable grace period in addition to the parking event before enforcement action is taken. In such instances the grace period must be a minimum of 10 minutes. 
13.4 " You should allow the driver a reasonable period to leave the private car park after the parking contract has ended before you take enforcement action. If the location is one where parking is normally permitted the grace period at the end of the parking period should be a minimum of 10 minutes

There was no visible sign indicating the claimants company at the entrance to the car park. 

The small print  on the signs in the car park was too small to be read from inside a vehicle. 

Coupon-mad

Those quotes are both about ten minutes when you leave.  There used to be one saying there must be a reasonable time also, to read signs and decide whether to stay or go  That is what I was getting at.

reg76

Coupon-mad said:

Those quotes are both about ten minutes when you leave.  There used to be one saying there must be a reasonable time also, to read signs and decide whether to stay or go  That is what I was getting at.

Ah yes I'll add that also and get it sent off, thanks very much