Letter before action Wells quay

finchman

Thanks Le_Kirk if I remove the restriction of processing is the rest ok

finchman

Frank With your letter Details of changes do I put 07/03 or the date of my offence

Le_Kirk

You can leave in the restriction but you have to require it because you are seeking debt advice NOT just because you submitted a SAR.

Have a read of the pre-action protocol for debt claims - HERE, particularly 4.2, quoted below: -

4.2 If the debtor indicates that they are seeking debt advice, the creditor must allow the debtor a reasonable period for the advice to be obtained. In any event, the creditor should not start court proceedings less than 30 days from receipt of the completed Reply Form or 30 days from the creditor providing any documents requested by the debtor, whichever is the later.

finchman

Thanks I'll have a look

finchman

Here is my letter to CEL, I wondered if this is suitable:-

Dear Sir/Madam,

Ref PCN??????

Your letter dated ????

I have made a SAR through your website and therefore require a restriction because I am seeking debt advice and the case should be put on hold. Please could the following documents be sent to the keepers address.

- A copy of the bylaws that apply to Wells harbour and the car park at the Port of Wells including a map that shows the extent of the area to which the byelaws apply.
- A full un-redacted copy of the contract that allows Civil Enforcement Limited to operate at Port of Wells carpark, The Quay, NR23 1AT.
-If the un-redacted version is not to be supplied until witness statement stage of the proceedings, I will except, under the PAP Protocols requiring open dealing and efforts to resolve disputes, a partially redacted version providing that the dates, location, terms of service and the agreement are transparent, together with the hours, days and dates of enforcement and listed contraventions and the agreed grace periods parking charge and any exemptions or seasonal arrangements that the land owner set.
-Whether or not you intend to rely on POFA
-Evidence of the time that the vehicle was parked (NOT car park entry, payment and exit times)
-Contemporaneous images of signs inside the area of the carpark in relation to where vehicle xxxxxx was parked.
-Contemporaneous images of signs and their location relative to the carpark entrance (to show how they would be seen by a driver approaching the carpark on the B1105 road, from either direction, prior to entry)
-Contemporaneous images of signs in the carpark erected by or belonging to the Wells Harbour Commissioners or other third parties.
-Details of improvements to signs and lighting that have been carried out by civil enforcement limited, Wells Harbour Commissioners or other third parties since ??? 2019. Please provide an explanation why the improvements were required.
-Details of changes to the terms and conditions displayed on the signage within the carpark that has been carried out by Civil Enforcement Limited, Wells Harbour Commissioners of other third parties since ??? 2019. Please provide an explanation why the changes were required.
-A copy of all ANPR images captured of this vehicle on the material date, given that this was late afternoon and there was likely to be some hold up of queuing traffic at the entrance and/or exit, and given that it has been reported that ANPR camera systems take several images over the seconds or minutes, as a car works its way round in or out of a site where the road outside was congested with traffic. It will not be enough to merely repeat the ‘first in/last out’ images that the ANPR system defaults to process for penalty charges.
-All other evidence that Civil Enforcement Limited will rely on in court.
-a full breakdown of all costs that Civil Enforcement Limited is claiming, to show which costs are included within the original £100.00 invoice and those that are additional costs. I am concerned that there is an element of double recovery in the £182.00 that Civil Enforcement Limited is claiming, which the court will view as abuse of process. Civil Enforcement must be aware that to claim in excess of £100.00 for a parking charge on private land is disallowed under the CPRs, the Beavis Case, the POFA 2012 Legislation and the CRA 2015, a view that has been upheld in multiple cases at the courts in Caernarfon and Southampton last year.

FrankCannon

Looks good to me. You might want to add the Isle of Wight, Warwick, Oxford and Reading to the list of courts in the abuse of process paragraph. Take a look at Beamerguy's thread ;

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

Le_Kirk

-If the un-redacted version is not to be supplied until witness statement stage of the proceedings, I will except, under the PAP Protocols

Maybe try this: -

-If the un-redacted version is not to be supplied until witness statement stage of the proceedings, I will [strike]except[/strike] accept, under the PAP Protocols

finchman

Thanks Frank I will add those
I will have to get a new secretary Le_Kirk thanks for pointing it out

finchman

I wondered if anyone could come up with an answer to this question the car park is within the harbour estate and is under statutory control,there is provision to make a byelaw for parking but none exists at the moment is the land on which the car park is located still classed as byelaw land as the DfTjust passed the buck and the Mhclg said speak to a solicitor 

Coupon-mad

If it's under statutory control then it is not relevant land, but is it 'under statutory control'? 

To work this out and to use as evidence, look at the DFT Guidance to Section 56/schedule 4 of the POFA, because this document is quite helpful, I find:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/9155/guidance-unpaid-parking-charges.pdf