Received Parking Fine / Legal action letter 16 months after date of contravention

Jingle1105

Redx said:

No , do not give them any data they are not entitled to

I would include a copy of the V5C that the PCN refers to , alternatively send redacted copies of 2 recent utility bills that contain your name address and date , as proof of I D

Never pass your data to people who are not government authorities or have no entitlement to it

I would also have created a Gmail email address for topics like this , not give out my actual email address , nor given my telephone number either

Thank you. So, they are not entitled to know my Date of Birth? I dont have the V5C as I no longer have the car. I never received a PCN just the 2 letters 16 moth's after the 'event'. 

Redx

Definitely not , use copies of 2 recent redacted utility bills then , plus add copies of those recent letters too

nosferatu1001

Never send them your DoB. Theyre not entiteled to it. Send them two utility bills, suitably redacted, as above. They cannot require a DoB to "prove" who you are, given they dont hold that info anyway so arent checking it against anything....

Jingle1105

Hi again - I have received the data held by TPS on me and they did indeed write to me at my old address (I hadn't realised I should have had my VC5 updated when I moved house).
Interestingly, the photo's of my car entering the car park also show a blown up photo of the reg number but the photo on exit shows the same blown up photo i.e white plate rather than yellow. The photo of the car on exit is very grainy and I don't believe the reg number is legible. Don't know if this is any kind of defence?
BW Legal have added 'our client's debt recovery costs of £54.00'  - is the the same as I have read elsewhere (but generally £60) that is being added without illegally?  If so, could anyone point me in the direction of the template I should send to them challenging this please? I can't seem to find it.
Thank-you 

Redx

It's not a defence , it's evidence that their claim is flawed plus there may be other legal points in your favour , such as poor signage , no landowner authority , POFA failures , CoP failures , the CRA , read the Feb 2020 template defence by coupon mad to see what a good defence looks like 

You will also find attachments there mentioning the unlawful fees they have inflated the claim with , plus beamerguy and others have mentioned it numerous times

nosferatu1001

Yes, of course its the same. If they raise a claim with that amount still in, that is unlawful. 
Have you found the LBC responses? Newbies thread.

Umkomaas

the photo's of my car entering the car park also show a blown up photo of the reg number but the photo on exit shows the same blown up photo i.e white plate rather than yellow.

They are not actual photos of your plates, they are computerised representations. The ANPR software reads the digits on your plates then superimposes them onto a white oblong strip for the NtK. You'll find most examples of NtKs in innumerable threads on the forum showing white 'plates', front and rear. 

Redx

Bearing in mind that important difference above which passed me by , concentrate on looking at the photos themselves , one front showing a white plate , one rear photo showing a yellow plate (not the computerised representations which are not the original photos)

A SAR should flush out the real photos , actual photos , not the reproductions on the NTK where they added anpr reads below artificially

KeithP

Why can't ANPR cameras look at the front plate upon entry and then again look at the front plate on exit?

Le_Kirk

KeithP said:

Why can't ANPR cameras look at the front plate upon entry and then again look at the front plate on exit?

Too easy?