ParkingEye Letter Before Claim & BWLegal Letter Of Claim

milo_2020

Hi,
Thanks for reading this thread, I have been a lurker many years here and taken the advise found throughout the forum and have always been successful.
Unfortunately, I have intercepted some letters that I saw my partner reading and noticed that she has 2 counts of parking fines being issued, one is over stay and one is non patron.

The overstay is with Parking Eye, I have been assisting with her communication and getting her to send the docs and requests, there have been some letters or emails which i have not seen and therefore put her/me in a bad position, I think. We missed the appeal of POPLA, I did not see the email communication until I requested SAR which included this along with a letter of good will allowing her to pay over instalments. This is now at the Letter Before County Claim with a form for her to fill in her expenses, we have not replied to this, this was dated the around the 16th of November (not sure if I should be putting the dates here?). The landowner for the car park in this case I cannot identify, there is no clear signage anywhere, the overstay was 2 hours around 50 minutes, she paid for 3 hours and due to the time social distancing and other various wait times meant her appointment lasted longer than the 3 hours she planned for. She knew she had overstayed but the place of appointment did not accept cash and therefore was unable to provide any change for her to at least buy another ticket to show willing. 

The more concerning one is with National Enforcement LTD, this is for non patron, I am not sure how much detail I should go into here but the gist of it is she pulled into a space and her passenger got out of the car and head towards the queue, her passenger decided to go into the shop next to them as the queue was long and they had not a lot of time to return to work (care). She returned back to the car and got in whilst my partner drove off, at no point did she get out the vehicle nor engine off, the total stay duration was just over 5 minutes. I asked about a 10 minute grace period and made note that the driver did not get out of the vehicle. This was appealed from the start and they provided CCTV images of the passenger leaving and returning with a bag that was not from the store, additionally they accidentally referred to the passenger as the driver in this response and additionally submit some photo evidence which had nothing to do with this. I know she has now received a Letter of Claim from BWLegal, I read it but she has lost this letter, the past few weeks have been very stressful our end and both these situations have caused significant stress and anxiety from her, wanting to take pay day loans to pay them off... We appealed this with the land owner and essentially were told they were happy for the case to proceed. (Large shopping brand in UK).

I have extensively read all the threads and believe I have taken all the steps but I perhaps have missed something? I presume both will issue proceedings so it is very likely I will need the assistance here to put together a proper defence.

Unfortunately, due to the times, she is working more than ever in a job that is absolutely required, she is not paid well at all and does not have the funds to pay the invoices, (nor a pay day loan as that will make her situation 10x worse).

Am I correct in thinking I should not be posting any details at all that may help the parking companies and/or thieving solicitors identify the case?
Many thanks
Milo2020

milo_2020

I dont' see an edit option but it is worth noting I have involved my local MP who agreed and sent a letter to the IPC but obviously they claim it is within rights.

milo_2020

Sorry.... I just read on another post that the SAR shouldn't go to BWLegal, I just checked and I didn't submit it to them, I submit it to national enforcement ltd, with no response.

Redx

I don't see anything that needs removing in either case , but if you snooze , you lose

I do not know the second company , do you have the correct name ?

In both cases , the recipient victim needs a landowner cancellation , otherwise court action is likely , because these companies have lost money due to covid19 , so are chasing outstanding invoices

There is a template defence in the Newbies FAQ sticky thread that can be adapted when required

The KEEPER victim should email the DPO at each PPC with a SAR request to obtain all their data , attaching a copy of the V5C to each request as proof of I D under the GDPR law

Castle

The second one is probably going to be National Parking Enforcement Ltd, I'd guess.

Umkomaas

Leaving the site cases ('Abused Patron Parking/Non Patron' - the latest bit of PPC-speak) is notoriously difficult to pursue. You need urgent photos of the signage to check what it says about leaving the site. The other issues are - is 'the site' defined anywhere, how does the PPC define 'the site', are there ground markings to show the limits, do the conditions apply only to the driver, or to any passenger, what are the conditions of the car park's use, these are all hurdles the PPC will need to get over. 

You say 'The more concerning one is with National Enforcement LTD, this is for non patron' - the more concerning one, in my view, is not that; it is most definitely the PE PCN. PE don't threaten court, then fail to pursue, they are litigious, and when they are, they're generally good at it.

milo_2020

Hi,

Thanks for the responses, yes it is National Parking Enforcement LTD, I have a picture of the signage, can I post that or is that giving too much information/location away?

She has no funds to pay either, I can contribute towards them but I have no intention to pay these companies any funds.

We are unable to find land owner for the first ParkingEye.

The landowner has replied to the second one (National):

"Good Morning

Thank you for your email regarding a parking notice that was incurred at the [SUPERMARKET] [LOCATION] store.

Some of our car parks are managed by an independent Carpark Management Company, [LOCATION] being one of them and is not part of the [SUPERMARKET]. 

They manage some of our car parks in line with their own terms and conditions stated on the signage at each location.  As an independent company they will follow the regulations and rules in place at each location and as they are independent I do not have access to the data gathered by the Car Park Management company through their CCTV systems.

Although I sympathise with the events of that day from your email I gather that the parking notice has been passed to a debt recovery agent, therefore unfortunately I am unable to assist you any further.

 Kindest regards
Louise Symons
[SUPERMARKET] Secure Response"

I sent several emails to this supermarket and they only responded once BWLegal got involved, interestingly enough she isn't able to assist now they are?

milo_2020

@Redx I don't see what you mean about snooze you lose, we have sent SAR request to both to obtain all their data, NPE did not respond, ParkingEye responded within 7 days and used the template and the privacy form as the newbies sticky said.

@Umkomaas Yes, I agree with you as that being more of the problem, I am just concerned because I don't have the BW Legal letter in front of me any more so I cannot recall or reference what it says... additionally NPE have responded to SAR request.

Umkomaas

additionally neither BW or NPE have responded to SAR request.

How long since you sent the SAR to them?

milo_2020

Umkomaas said:

additionally neither BW or NPE have responded to SAR request.

How long since you sent the SAR to them?

I sent the request on the 8th of October 2020, they responded on the 20th asking for reg and reference, the response was sent back to them on the 21st with no response, however I have just replied in the thread again with the original email in saying I have not received a response since I provided the details. I have re-provided the details and hopefully this will return a response.

Redx

milo_2020 said:

@Redx I don't see what you mean about snooze you lose, we have sent SAR request to both to obtain all their data, NPE did not respond, ParkingEye responded within 7 days and used the template and the privacy form as the newbies sticky said.

@Umkomaas Yes, I agree with you as that being more of the problem, I am just concerned because I don't have the BW Legal letter in front of me any more so I cannot recall or reference what it says... additionally NPE have responded to SAR request.

The parking eye one should have been landowner complaint at the time , if not the supermarket then the retail park management , plus a prompt appeal to parking eye , plus an appeal to Popla.

If all that was done and failed , then PE will most likely issue a court claim as Umkomaas said , so the more serious of the two

If those procedures were not followed. , So snoozed , the the victim is likely to lose

So prompt action was required at the time , no snoozing

The second NPE one should have followed a similar route , definitely a landowner complaint and initial appeal

Burying heads in sand does not help

Any court cases are likely from 2021 onwards , where the ability to pay or not does not enter into it

A typical loss to Parking Eye in court is £175 , the other one £200

Non payment  of a court loss would give a CCJ for 6 years against the victim

Parking Eye took Barry Beavis to 3 courts 5 years ago and beat him 3 times , his error was an overstay on a free car park with a 2 hour maximum stay