CST letters' forum group thread

D_P_Dance

They have added what appears to be an extra unlawful amount of £70 for debt collection. 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

Also read this

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

KeithP

FrankCannon said:

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

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

Ah, right.

So they have a Privacy Policy and a Privacy Notice both linked from the bottom of every page on their website.

One of them is hopelessly out of date.
One of them includes the email address of their Data Protection Officer.

sqizzeroony

KeithP said:

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.

Yes I picked up on the £10 charge and mentioned later in the letter that it should be free unless excessive or repetitive so expect a response without charge, and should I have to chase them for missing information it would fall under the original request. It’s on the second page of the letter that I had to have removed as had left some personal information unredacted like a newbie would lol. 

sqizzeroony

FrankCannon said:

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

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

Thank you I see there is an email address on this one so I will send it off there. Much appreciated

sqizzeroony

KeithP said:

FrankCannon said:

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

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

Ah, right.

So they have a Privacy Policy and a Privacy Notice both linked from the bottom of every page on their website.

One of them is hopelessly out of date.
One of them includes the email address of their Data Protection Officer.

Don’t know whether it’s incompetence or intentional misleading, however I’ve got another avenue of contact now so appreciate the help thank you both x

TeddyRuxpin83

Hi all,

Here's my letter CST, received today. Seems they've ditched the £15 fee plus their client is now Park Direct and not Debt Recovery Plus, so can't ask for the clarification with the 'client DRP'. They're still adding £60 though, rather than £70 for some people?!

Read through pages 1-40 then skipped to pages 60-67. Brain is buzzing with acronyms. I'll be going through the Newbies thread (again) but my, what a headache. So confusing...

I also DID actually pay the parking fee, just a little after the ticket was issued. But PDUK will have lost no income as the night-time parking rate was a flat fee, paid via an app.

Cheers,

Teddy

D_P_Dance

If the are trying to charge 10 for a rutine SAR complain to Trading standards.

They have added what appears to be an extra unlawful amount of £60 for debt collection. 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

Also read this

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

patient_dream

CST ??? looking at the letter, the sheer lack of intelligence beggars belief.

At one time they thought DRP instructed them ????

Now they give the parking charge number, where it happened and make a fake claim the ticket is £160 ??   

Nobody has ever seen a £160 parking ticket, it's so rare that I would be asking CST for a copy, I'm sure a judge would like a copy as well for proof

Coupon-mad

It's a LBC so respond and start a new thread. 

You should be denying any debt (state that the payment was made) in writing or by email, asking for a 30 day hold (but ask at the end of the month, to get it extended into January) and doing a SAR from the PPC, if you haven't already.

HarryCrumb

I got a LBC from CST Law today.  It's dated from 9 days ago, and they are trying to charge me twice for the same PCN, totalling £340.  I've got my own thread going which I will reply to about this, but I've been reading through this one as much as I can. 

I'm already drafting a SAR to the parking firm, and a letter to CST, as per the guidlines in the newbies thread.  Is it of any benefit to the forum for me to add an image of the LBC here?  Otherwise, I won't bother.  It's the same format as all the previous images posted, and name drops ECP.  The payment details on the back refer to DRP.