CST letters' forum group thread

Wigwamfan

I have a LBC from CST. Claimant Anchor/Care Parking. £160 to be paid to Creditstyle. Does not give details of "offence".

(I will do recommended robust LBC response towards end of 30 days)

Alleged contravention was early 2019. 

My query is should I request SAR to try & drag things out to 2025 (not sure how quickly Anchor respond to such requests) or am I better going down no SAR route & using CEL v Chan?

N.b. an appeal may have been submitted at time & paperwork mistakenly not retained. So could do with reviewing appeal documentation (presuming appeal correspondence provided by PPC when respond to SAR) as appellant was naive & not aware of this forum in 2019. Will have acknowledged notice, possibly admitted to being driver & to parking so not sure if can then use CEL v Chan & claim don't know POC anyway.... 

Le_Kirk

@Wigwamfan, is this to do with your thread here: -
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6357976/new-query#latest
If so, you should post your question on it.  If you submit a SAR and receive everything about your case, it does make using CEL v Chan more problematical and probably won't stretch out the case until 2025 - anyone receiving a SAR has only 30 days to respond.

Wigwamfan

No, it's a different ticket 😬 (other case gone quiet).

Thanks for advice. So can still use CEL v Chan if you appealed (& received kangaroo court rejection) thus demonstrating an awareness of the particulars of the alleged contravention at the time? 

Umkomaas

Wigwamfan said:

No, it's a different ticket 😬 (other case gone quiet).

Thanks for advice. So can still use CEL v Chan if you appealed (& received kangaroo court rejection) thus demonstrating an awareness of the particulars of the alleged contravention at the time? 

You defend against the charge (Particulars of Claim) actually detailed on the court claim form. The chances are it will be generic, template, woefully inadequate in specifics. That's why we now suggest holding off on a SAR. If the PoC are more detailed than anticipated, plenty of time then to whip off a SAR. Wait to see if they do actually issue a claim.

Coupon-mad

In short: DON'T do a SAR.

pearsrse90

Hi, 

I acknowledge the requests of the board members ad nauseum to avoid duplicating requests, but I wanted to throw in a variation that might be new. 

Essentially,

• CST Law LBC letter received today, dated 22nd November. The format is just the same as the most recent ones. 
• Alleged contravention is Oct 2019 - and the Claimant is Anchor Security Services t/a Care Parking 
• I ignored a letter from Debt Recovery Plus Limited a couple of months ago - that was the first letter I have received in relation to all this and a quick glance at the forums suggested to ignore these - I'll admit I didnt do a deep dive though. 
• Not denying the contravention took place HOWEVER I received a PCN in the post in April 2020 which from memory referred to something in 2019, which I paid £60 to make go away. (I know, what a mug!). I didn't keep the letter as I considered the matter closed. 
• They never contacted me at the time about another contravention so they are either a) chancing it with a charge that was already paid or b) they have failed to let me know about the second one in the time since. 
• Worth noting that I moved house in Nov 2020, then again in May 2021 where I have been since - driving licenses and V5 certificates updated accordingly within a month or so of moving on each one. Possible that I have missed letters, but I've been static for 30 months now, so they're clearly not quick on their feet. 

Basically, my question is, beyond following post #2 on the NEWBIES thread, does any of the above change anything? I am also assuming that a SAR will show up any payments made and therefore what it is in relation to? 


Additionally, no question, just want to highlight that one of the directors who has links to a number of the collection agencies is also a former director of various Capita Pensions companies, a post she held for four years. Like I say, no question, more just dismay and confusion about how people get involved in these sorts of companies.

Cheers

footballman644

Hi, first time on this after reading countless of hours of these forums and stressing over this charge. I thought I would share my email I sent to Credit Style as CST Law 'no longer operate emails'? This directed me to the creditstyle website where I was asked to fill in a form and the message. I did not want to bother anyone prior this and thought this email was adequate. What would be my steps after this? 

In context- I am just a 16 year old on behalf of my foreign parents who have a language barrier so I do apologise for any grammatical or informal choice of words. I have copied and edited the template to its appropriate situation where my dad has received this LBC just yesterday while the date shows the 20th of November. This has left us with 23 days left and we have not received any letter before this which has shocked us all. We really cannot afford this and I am trying my best to at least minimise this charge down to £100 as I have read. How confident should I be and thank you in advance for anyone who replies. I can provide details to anyone's request whom may assist as well. Thank you and I am very appreciative for this chance.








Dear Sir/Madam,

Your Ref. 
Proposed Legal Proceedings
Claimant: Anchor Security Services Ltd

I refer to your your letter before claim.

I confirm that my address for service for the time being is as follows, and any older address must be erased from your records:

I am sourcing and seeking independent debt advice and contacting the initial landowner of the property and willing to bring this up to the local MP for this predatory conduct, I formally request that this matter be put on hold for an additional 30 days, in accordance with the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims 2017.

I note that the amount being claimed has increased by a hugely exaggerated amount which the Government stated  "extorting money from motorists".

I have three questions, and under the PAP I am entitled to specific answers:

1. Am I to understand that the additional £60 represents what you lot dress up as a 'Debt Recovery' fee, and if so, is this net or inclusive of VAT? If the latter, would you kindly explain why I am being asked to pay the operator’s VAT? This fee is not 'justifiable' in any way from the perspective of a father of four children struggling in this economy.

2. With regard to the principal alleged PCN sum: Is this damages, or will it be pleaded as consideration for parking? Please state this more clearly.

3. I would like to know why a letter before claim was sent before any other stage? I have not received any prior letter regarding this situation and appreciate the explanation behind this.

Another request I would like is the photographic evidence labelled with the date and time, clear photos of the driver, and the period stayed.

Please do not send any rubbish which does not refer to my questions as this matter is being taken very seriously and will be shown in court if necessary.

Yours faithfully

Coupon-mad

Very good work!

We assume you aren't in Scotland.

Looks like your parents forgot to update the car reg address on the logbook V5C.  That's the reason for receiving no PCNs or reminder letters.  Urgent: they MUST go online and put the V5C address right with the DVLA.

This bit needs the new address confirmed of course (I assume you redacted it in this post):

I confirm that my address for service for the time being is as follows, and any older address must be erased from your records:

Finally start your own thread on behalf of your parents (by hitting the red circle here).  You need to ask the retailers to cancel this PCN.

Remii

Hi guys, first of all thanks for all the information on here and for what you guys do. 

I received a Letter Before Claim from CST in July 2021 (for Euro Car Parks), I requested a SAR and sent email to say I was seeking advice etc as instructed. I thought the whole issue was forgotten about until I received another LBC yesterday (letter dated 7th Dec). 

Now I am a little confused as I've seen recent posts to say ignore this letter (if I'm not mistaken). I'd rather respond although not to request a SAR as I already have that. Is that reasonable?

The reason I'd rather respond is because I am worried they can issue a CCJ - isn't that a tactic that can be used if you do not respond? 

The other issue is that the tickets are for multiple PCN's not just one, so there is more incentive for them to chase it up. 

Finally, the new LBC 'pack' with forms etc is slightly different to the older one. Before it mentioned to pay DRP but now it says to pay Credit Style Limited (as shown by other recent attachments) but it also says,

"You have received this notice because A BUSINESS intends to take you to court in relation to a debt..."

My question is, do I still send an email to Credit Style as I did almost two years ago albeit slightly adjusted and do I request which business it is that is taking me to court or do they not have to answer that? 

Any other advice would be helpful. Thanks again. 

Coupon-mad

No you can't just get a CCJ by not responding to letters. As long as you don't ignore a claim.

CST is DRP. Same stable.

Send the new LBC response in the 2nd post oif the NEWBIES thread.

@footballman644 and @Remii

...please hit the red button and start new threads about your case if you want bespoke advice for your stage (BUT ONLY after reading the 2nd post of the NEWBIES thread first, please).