CST letters' forum group thread

sqizzeroony

D_P_Dance said:

Have you complained to you MP?

On my list along with landowner thank you x

northseajoe1

patient_dream said:

[edited]

CST (AKA CREDIT STYLE) is already under investigation with the SRA

[edited]

Not sure whether there is still any SRA investigation ongoing.  See my previous post (7 Oct @ 12:15) for the dull outcome of the last set of complaints.

CheesyMac

Good afternoon,

I have read through the Newbies thread following on from a LBC letter I have received. (At the bottom of the page)

On the same day I:

• Emailed Smart Parking with a SAR
• Emailed CST Law instructing them with "I am seeking debt advice" etc 
• Emailed DVLA with a SAR for which organisations have requested information between said dates, what information and what reason that if at all has been requested.

I have received the SAR request back from Smart Parking with the following reply.

"Good afternoon, 

Thank you for providing me with proof of your identity, I can now action your request. 

Please find attached all data on the system in relation to this VRM and yourself. 

The data provided has been re-generated from our systems as we hold in raw data form rather than hard copies of paperwork and for this reason letters are not re-produced on headed paper and the date displayed is that of the re-printing date may not be the original date.   

If we can provide the original, then it has been attached here for you. 

I am unable to provide you with any data from the machines, as it would hold the data of other Data Subjects. 

I have also attached a copy of the terms and conditions for reference."

Should I put in a SAR to CST Law also?

The ticket is allegedly at £110 yet CST law are trying to recover £170. So an unlawful £60 has been added.

I understand that CST law can not be instructed by Smart Parking?

What would be the next step?

Thanks 

patient_dream

CheesyMac said:

Good afternoon,

I have read through the Newbies thread following on from a LBC letter I have received. (At the bottom of the page)

On the same day I:

• Emailed Smart Parking with a SAR
• Emailed CST Law instructing them with "I am seeking debt advice" etc 
• Emailed DVLA with a SAR for which organisations have requested information between said dates, what information and what reason that if at all has been requested.

I have received the SAR request back from Smart Parking with the following reply.

"Good afternoon, 

Thank you for providing me with proof of your identity, I can now action your request. 

Please find attached all data on the system in relation to this VRM and yourself. 

The data provided has been re-generated from our systems as we hold in raw data form rather than hard copies of paperwork and for this reason letters are not re-produced on headed paper and the date displayed is that of the re-printing date may not be the original date.   

If we can provide the original, then it has been attached here for you. 

I am unable to provide you with any data from the machines, as it would hold the data of other Data Subjects. 

I have also attached a copy of the terms and conditions for reference."

Should I put in a SAR to CST Law also?

The ticket is allegedly at £110 yet CST law are trying to recover £170. So an unlawful £60 has been added.

I understand that CST law can not be instructed by Smart Parking?

What would be the next step?

Thanks 

The ticket cannot be £110 ... it is £100 and CST has added a fake £70

CST show the ticket number and a charge of £170 ?

This is clearly a feeble attempt to hide their fake add-on.
If you look back on this thread you will see that in the past they were so foolish that they thought DRP instructed them ?

In a nutshell the letter above shows they are lying to you and an attempt to deceive the court
and you

D_P_Dance

They have added what appears to be an extra unlawful amount of £10. Judges have dismissed an entire claim because of this. Read this and complain to 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

sqizzeroony

sqizzeroony said:

Hello fellow forum members. Been a reader for a little while with a PCN now turned into Letter Before Claim from CST Law, and so registered in order to post. Due to personal circumstances in the early period of letters, the POPLA and appeal stages were missed and the further Debt Recovery Plus letters ignored as advised. Have read Newbies post etc and gone down the forum rabbit hole of information and links (advice for which I’m very grateful), and finally posting my SAR (no email address on their website) and Acknowledgment to CST Law draft letters for review and editing before sending…. cobbled together from initial template advice as well as what others have posted. Things can get very confusing after the massive intake of information from various places and cases, so not too sure if I’ve asked the right parties the right things, asked too much or too little etc. Edit as you please - at the moment I can’t see the wood for the trees anymore and your eagle eyes and wisdom will be much appreciated. 

My next step is also to try and find the McDonalds manager info and contact them regarding the matter to see if it can be quashed that way - not easily able to get there in person.

The V5C - do I send all 4 pages of this or only first page?

Many thanks all

Hi all - My SAR to MET Parking Services has been returned as 'undeliverable' marked 'addressee gone away' for the address provided on their website (no email or other address provided). What do I do in this instance?

Coupon-mad

So, when you Google MET parking privacy there isn't a DPO email?  I think you are right:

https://www.metparking.com/privacy-policy/

Complain to the BPA and get your MP to weigh in and write to the BPA about this too.

KeithP

Also interesting to note that their Privacy Page spells it out quite clearly that they think they can charge £10 for responding to a SAR...

Earlier in that missive they do define 'the Act' as the Data Protection Act 1998.

We all know that there is a later Data Protection Act 2018.

FrankCannon

I think the privacy policy is here ......

https://www.metparking.com/privacynotice/

patient_dream

Regarding CST and their Letter Before Claim ?

Throughout this thread, we constantly see their comedy of errors.  With you, they are  stating the PCN number and claiming the charge is £170 ?

We all know that is a fabrication and wishful thinking but the facts are simple, there is no such thing as a £170 parking ticket 

CST need to explain this as they are attempting to deceive you and a court