Letter before claim from ELMS Legal

Motty2014

Hi,
I have received a "Letter before Claim" from ELMS Legal (on 09/02/2021) in reference to a parking fine issued to me (RK) in March 2018.

The original PCN stated that the driver had in fact parked beyond the bay markings. The day this happened, the driver entered the carpark, a car left the space and they then parked in said space. The lines on the floor are faint (as shown by the pictures below) and there is also a white line on the ground making it look like a genuine space, easy mistake to make when driving in.

With regards to the "Letter before Claim" they have added on the £60 debt collection charge so I went back to them using the standard response as shown on one of the other threads and they have responded with "The additional £60.00 is a debt recovery charge allowed by our clients trade association, the IPC"



What should I do next? I haven't responded to the actual claim in terms of disputing it as of yet, my only correspondence has been in relation to disputing the legality of the £60 charge.

Any help would be massively appreciated.

Many thanks

Le_Kirk

Who is the letter addressed to?  If it is addressed to you as registered keeper, then fine, carry on.  If it is addressed to your wife as RK, then it must be answered in her name.  Whoever, it is addressed to, suggest you (both) read the NEWBIE sticky as all your questions will be answered there.

Motty2014

Thanks, yes it is addressed to me as the registered keeper, but it was my wife who was driving at the time. I have read through the NEWBIE thread but will go over it again. The impression I am getting is that I just wait for the court papers given they have responded to me and sent me copies of all the evidence they have on the case.

nosferatu1001

"they" meaning the PPC? Or Elms?
The SAR goes to the PPC, noone else. 

Motty2014

ELMS are the ones who have sent me copies of all the evidence, it wasn't something I requested from them either, they sent it in response to my first email questioning the legality of the added £60 shown on the "Letter before claim".

nosferatu1001

OK, so the newbies thread also says to send a SAR to the PPC

beamerguy

With regards to the "Letter before Claim" they have added on the £60 debt collection charge so i went back to them using the standard response as shown on one of the other threads and they have responded with "The additional £60.00 is a debt recovery charge allowed by our clients trade association, the IPC"

Elms are just talking rubbish, you as a motorist have no contract with any code of practice and the joke is that the IPC is just one big scam ...... the joke is on Elms for thinking that.

So, they are NOT telling you what is their legal authority to add a fake £60 ?
The code of practice IS NOT a legal authority ..... the judges know that.
Assume the PPC is either VCS or Excel, same set up, 

And you can tell Elms that you will rely on EXCEL v WILKINSON
The claim was struck out for ABUSE OF PROCESS.  DDJ Jackson who is now HHJ Jackson made this ruling.  
https://www.dropbox.com/s/16qovzulab1szem/G4QZ465V Excel v Wilkinson.pdf?dl=0

Fruitcake

It is not a fine.

What is the name of the PPC?

Was the NTK PoFA compliant? If not then you should not be telling the world who was driving. Only ever refer to The Driver and The Keeper, who are two different people as far as the law is concerned.
If the NTK was not PoFA compliant, the keeper cannot be held liable, only the driver.

Parking scammers read this forum.

Motty2014

The PPC is Excel Parking Services Limited.

beamerguy

Motty2014 said:

The PPC is Excel Parking Services Limited.

Figures ..... with the EXCEL case shown above, they need to read the last comments of DDJ Jackson, now HHJ Jackson  Paras 43 and 44.

Elms could now be leading EXCEL INTO DISASTER

Half_way

do not attempt to identify the driver, never use words such as neighbour, friend, husband, I, he, she, wife, uncle, aunt etc.

You can give the location, where was it?