Stupidly ignored parking charge notice- hearing today update

Coupon-mad

Cbay27 wrote: »

I guess I strap a pair on and prepare to go to court or pay it, not keen on either!!

Yep, I'm a 5' 3'' non legally qualified mother of 4 and I strapped on a pair (not literally of course!) when I faced and beat BW Legal's barrister at Southampton Court last week!*

You and I and all the posters here, and PP Legal, KNOW that they cannot have £170.

It is easy to put the CRA 2015 into evidence...the law 'speaks for you' if you take the Judge to the right paragraphs of that Act (schedule 2), and the POFA, and Beavis.

*See CEC16's thread. This is the same.

Cbay27

Half of this I don’t even understand!! The only evidence I have that I thought I had paid is a 1 minute phone call on my phone bill, is this enough to win in court? I know a similar case had evidence of a 6 minute phone call. I’ll read up on that thread and the other points

Coupon-mad

the only evidence I have that I thought I had paid is a 1 minute phone call on my phone bill, is this enough to win in court?

Not on its own, which is why we want you to read CEC16's thread.*

They cannot have £170 and you WILL (I promise) understand why not, when you actually sit down and read what I said at Southampton and the paragraphs and consumer law I pointed to (which is all in plain English, nothing very legalese).

Of course you don't understand it as you haven't come off this thread yet and are still flailing a bit. You need to read the resources we have here and copy what we show you.




*NO LINK GIVEN - THE FIRST TEST OF RESEARCH/FORUM USE FOR ANY NEWBIE, IS FOR YOU TO PRACTISE USING THE FORUM TO FIND A THREAD BY A NAMED MEMBER!

Cbay27

I worked out how to find threads yesterday so at least I’m able to do something ! ��

Redx

you cannot expect to understand this complicated topic in just a few days , rome wasnt built in a day !!!


the regulars answering you have several years or decades of dealing with these topics, so you are going to have to trust our word and do plenty of reading until the penny drops


a week ago coupon mad was in court assisting another member , up against a barrister , and won (even the legal eagles lose in court) - see the CEC16 thread

Cbay27

I’ve read through that thread, need to go through it again to fully understand. Just concerned about a couple of points, my entry time was 9.59 but I didn’t call ring go til 10.12 so slightly over the allowed time and also my ignoring the original letters despite thinking I had gone over on my parking. I am presuming these points won’t matter as if I am found guilty over it I will have to pay £100 rather than the £170 they want now. Thoughts on this?

Coupon-mad

There is no 'finding you guilty' as this is not criminal court. Think 'Judge Rinder'.

Taking 12 or 13 mins to actually get through to the phone provider after:

driving in,
driving round, past other car & pedestrians
finding a space,
parking,
getting out,
grabbing your bag,
locking the car,
walking to the machine/signage,
queuing to pay,
reading the instructions,
getting your phone out,
double checking the right phone app (Ringgo, Pay by Phone, etc. as per the sign)
THEN calling RingGo or registering, or using an app & checking the data was right


...can certainly be argued as completely reasonable for that car park.

Cbay27

So I have received my lbc and asked for SAR, I have been asked to supply further info by premier park to confirm my identity so I have sent a screenshot of my online energy bill and asked if this is sufficient, no response since Tuesday 3rd March. Also received  this from BW legal... 
Please note that we are acting on Our Client’s instructions to recover the above balance which remains due and owed by yourself to Our Client.

 

We have informed client that you have raised a subject access request.

 

Information about the right to restrict processing is available on the Information Commissioner’s Office website www.ico.org.uk. The right to restrict processing only applies in certain limited circumstances. We are not of the view that the right to restrict processing is applicable in this case. Your data is processed for the lawful purposes set out in the Privacy Notice, a copy of which is enclosed and available onwww.bwlegal.co.uk. Whilst we acknowledge you have made a request for information with Our Client it is important to note that this does not affect the validity of Our Client’s Claim meaning that Our Client has an overriding legitimate interest to recover the sums due to them.

 

As such, your account will not be suspended from further collections activity unless we are instructed to do so by Our Client. Please contact us to reach a suitable resolution. 

Should I contact PP about this? Is this a standard response from BW legal? 

Thanks

 

Umkomaas

If you want a suspension of proceedings for 30 days, you need to tell BWL that while you deny any debt exists, you are nonetheless seeking debt advice (the magic words) and they are required to suspend activity for 30 days as per the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims. 

Cbay27

Thanks for that. Can I just clarify something else, after the 30 day extension and when I have received the SAR what do I do, just wait for the claim letter? I have read through other threads regarding this car park and the land is owned by the maritime museum who have not been useful in cancelling other charges so I don’t think it is worth going down the complaint to landowner road in this case. Sorry if I have missed the obvious here. Thanks again