Advice re blue badge owner

D_P_Dance

No, don't; that's pointless.

Of course it is not.  Have you not heard about straw and camels?

D_P_Dance

"They have since increased what they say they own me from £100 to some £270."

Do you mean you owe them £270?  

They have added what appears to be an extra unlawful amount for debt collection. This amounts to double recovery and Judges all over the country are dismissing these spurious additions. Indeed some judges have dismissed entire claims because of this. Read this and complain to Trading Standards and your MP,

Excel v Wilkinson

At the Bradford County Court, District Judge Claire Jackson (now HHJ Jackson, a Specialist Civil Circuit Judge) decided to hear a 'test case' a few months ago, where £60 had been added to a parking charge despite Judges up and down the country repeatedly disallowing that sum and warning parking firms not to waste court time with such spurious claims.   That case was Excel v Wilkinson: G4QZ465V, heard in July 2020 and leave to appeal was refused and that route was not pursued.  The Judge concluded that such claims are proceedings with 'an improper collateral purpose'.   This Judge - and others who have since copied her words and struck dozens of cases out in late 2020 and into 2021 - went into significant detail and concluded that parking operators (such as this Claimant) are seeking to circumvent CPR 27.14 as well as breaching the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   DJ Hickinbottom has recently struck more cases out in that court area, stating: ''I find that striking out this claim is the only appropriate manner in which the disapproval of the court can be shown''.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/16qovzulab1szem/G4QZ465V%20Excel%20v%20Wilkinson.pdf?dl=0

However, VCS appealed this so it may not apply in all cases, read this

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ntksx9g7177ahyg/VCS v Percy v1 Amendments (2).pdf?dl=0Also read this

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6279348/witness-statements-2-transcripts-re-parking-firms-false-costs-recorder-cohen-qc-judgment-2021/p1

Also consider complaining to The SRA about the solicitor, if one is involved They are fully aware of the unlawful nature of most of thse additions yet persist in adding them..

https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/problems/

[Deleted User]

Coupon-mad said:

So, how about providing your evidence of disability and PIP letter and back of the blue badge now (photo redacted so it's not a full ID copy). 

Tell them that this is provided to help narrow the issues and in return you require two things at this stage:

(A). BW Legal's full log or table of all contact and attempted contact with you, either by phone, text or letter/email in the months between when they received the case up until Letter of Claim stage.  State that you know this exists because BW Legal have provided it before to a motorist and they must consider this a SAR, and

(B) A response and evidence (if any exists) from their client, showing whether the Pay and Display machine clock was synchronised each day (or at all) with the ANPR clocks, given they are entirely separate systems and servers and it is your position that the timings are unsynchronised as well as lacking any 'reasonable adjustment' provision for disabled drivers.

I heard back from BW Legal today regarding (B) above. They said:

"Good morning,

Further to the below, our client has confirmed that the ANPR cameras and payment machines are checked regularly and synchronised. Due to the nature of how this is done, they are not able to provide evidence of this but have confirmed that this is done.

Should you have any further queries, please do not hesitate to get in contact."

 

[Deleted User]

BW Legal also sent another massive A4 envelope in the post on Saturday, containing another payment demand. It seemed to be under the pretext of outlining their client's position (again). No new information was included, just their reply to my appeal in 2019 along with their forms to declare income etc (again).

It definitely feels like harassment now. Especially after they received 5/6 documents declaring my disability.

Coupon-mad

HotelUniform74 said:

Coupon-mad said:

So, how about providing your evidence of disability and PIP letter and back of the blue badge now (photo redacted so it's not a full ID copy). 

Tell them that this is provided to help narrow the issues and in return you require two things at this stage:

(A). BW Legal's full log or table of all contact and attempted contact with you, either by phone, text or letter/email in the months between when they received the case up until Letter of Claim stage.  State that you know this exists because BW Legal have provided it before to a motorist and they must consider this a SAR, and

(B) A response and evidence (if any exists) from their client, showing whether the Pay and Display machine clock was synchronised each day (or at all) with the ANPR clocks, given they are entirely separate systems and servers and it is your position that the timings are unsynchronised as well as lacking any 'reasonable adjustment' provision for disabled drivers.

I heard back from BW Legal today regarding (B) above. They said:

"Good morning,

Further to the below, our client has confirmed that the ANPR cameras and payment machines are checked regularly and synchronised. Due to the nature of how this is done, they are not able to provide evidence of this but have confirmed that this is done.

Should you have any further queries, please do not hesitate to get in contact."

 

They would say this, wouldn't they?!

Reply and state there MUST be evidence or a clear account of how the two completely separate systems are time-synched (if indeed they ever are) and how often.

Also ask again for the two other things above.

[Deleted User]

Coupon-mad said:

HotelUniform74 said:

Coupon-mad said:

So, how about providing your evidence of disability and PIP letter and back of the blue badge now (photo redacted so it's not a full ID copy). 

Tell them that this is provided to help narrow the issues and in return you require two things at this stage:

(A). BW Legal's full log or table of all contact and attempted contact with you, either by phone, text or letter/email in the months between when they received the case up until Letter of Claim stage.  State that you know this exists because BW Legal have provided it before to a motorist and they must consider this a SAR, and

(B) A response and evidence (if any exists) from their client, showing whether the Pay and Display machine clock was synchronised each day (or at all) with the ANPR clocks, given they are entirely separate systems and servers and it is your position that the timings are unsynchronised as well as lacking any 'reasonable adjustment' provision for disabled drivers.

I heard back from BW Legal today regarding (B) above. They said:

"Good morning,

Further to the below, our client has confirmed that the ANPR cameras and payment machines are checked regularly and synchronised. Due to the nature of how this is done, they are not able to provide evidence of this but have confirmed that this is done.

Should you have any further queries, please do not hesitate to get in contact."

 

They would say this, wouldn't they?!

Obviously, reply and state there MUST be evidence or a clear account of how the two completely separate systems are time-synched (if indeed they ever are) and how often.

Also ask again for the two other things above that I will not repeat (see my words above).

I have done the above now. Thanks for support.

I'm still waiting on (A) and BW Legal say request will be processed.

I also got a text message from bwlegal today harassing me again for payment.

I don't recall ever giving them my phone number nor giving them permission to contact me!

D_P_Dance

ANPR cameras are not all tyhey are cracked up yp be, read this

https://metro.co.uk/2021/10/18/surrey-writing-on-womans-jumper-landed-couple-with-fine-when-she-walked-in-bus-lane-15439916/

[Deleted User]

Coupon-mad said:

HotelUniform74 said:

Coupon-mad said:

So, how about providing your evidence of disability and PIP letter and back of the blue badge now (photo redacted so it's not a full ID copy). 

Tell them that this is provided to help narrow the issues and in return you require two things at this stage:

(A). BW Legal's full log or table of all contact and attempted contact with you, either by phone, text or letter/email in the months between when they received the case up until Letter of Claim stage.  State that you know this exists because BW Legal have provided it before to a motorist and they must consider this a SAR, and

(B) A response and evidence (if any exists) from their client, showing whether the Pay and Display machine clock was synchronised each day (or at all) with the ANPR clocks, given they are entirely separate systems and servers and it is your position that the timings are unsynchronised as well as lacking any 'reasonable adjustment' provision for disabled drivers.

I heard back from BW Legal today regarding (B) above. They said:

"Good morning,

Further to the below, our client has confirmed that the ANPR cameras and payment machines are checked regularly and synchronised. Due to the nature of how this is done, they are not able to provide evidence of this but have confirmed that this is done.

Should you have any further queries, please do not hesitate to get in contact."

 

They would say this, wouldn't they?!

Obviously, reply and state there MUST be evidence or a clear account of how the two completely separate systems are time-synched (if indeed they ever are) and how often.

Also ask again for the two other things above that I will not repeat (see my words above).

In regards to (B) above, I got the SAR request back from BW Legal, they sent a 234 page document in return.

I'm not clear what I'm looking for in here, it doesn't seem to contain any extra information I've not seen before.

In regards to (A), I emailed them back same day as my post above requesting evidence of synchronisation of their systems and said I couldn't just take their word that systems are synchronised.

They've ignored that email.

Anything else I should be doing now? 3rd request for ANPR synchronisation evidence?

Cheers and have a good weekend.

Coupon-mad

Did you miss this?

and it is your position that the timings are unsynchronised as well as lacking any 'reasonable adjustment' provision for disabled drivers.

That was the second thing and was why I said follow them up out the 'other two things'. 

[Deleted User]

Coupon-mad said:

Did you miss this?

and it is your position that the timings are unsynchronised as well as lacking any 'reasonable adjustment' provision for disabled drivers.

That was the second thing and was why I said follow them up out the 'other two things'. 

OK. Please bear with me. Brain fog today.

I've read through this page (22) three times now and I think you're saying that I need to make it my position that because they have twice failed, when asked, to provide evidence of synchronicity between their systems they can't demonstrate that the time I entered car park on their ANPR would be the same as the time on the payment machine? Does the 'reasonable adjustment' part enter the fray because if say ANPR is 5 minutes faster than payment machine, they're actually taking time away from me, rather than giving me extra time?

I'm really sorry but I can't work out what the other thing was?

Do I need to email BW Legal again and say basically "show me evidence of synchronised systems, or this is another arrow to the bow of the disability discrimination argument"?

Sorry about this.