CTS LAW Letter before claim Help needed

beamerguy

Ed30reflex said:

I have sent a response back to ECR & CTS as-well DVLA and DPO as per our discussion. Once I have a response back, I’f I do! I will put the update here incase it helps any one else out.

Personally I would not worry about CST.   You could end up having a lot of fun with their rubbish

beamerguy

Ed30reflex said:

beamerguy said:

Ed30reflex i     "It says ''Instructed by ECP'' however my issue is the fact that if instructed by ECP then why are the payment details to DRP and not ECP,"

And that is my point.  Not only are CST faking the amounts, they are also faking who to pay.

Worth asking CST the question.

CST and DRP are bed fellows.  Therefore CST are attempting to support DRP who are joined at the hip
DRP have no legal right to receive any money.

DRP are only circus clowns and CST appear to have joined the circus, 

" Lastly when sending the SAR to ECP should i inform them i am contacting the DVLA?"

Your SAR is for collecting information they hold on you.  No point in alerting them to anything else


CST may well be stupid enough to issue a court claim because it is a lot of money.  It will cost them to do that but ....... immediately they have a problem because to do so, they need to sign a statement of truth which is not true.  A judge could rule contempt of court against them and that is serious

Any claim adding fake amounts will not be reliable and as such you can ask for the case to be struck out for abuse of process and to be awarded costs and as ECP are penalising you for doing your day to day business, unreasonable costs could be awarded as well.


CST are and have always been out of their depth chasing parking tickets and it's a surprise that ECP have even instructed them.  An honest claim is one thing but trying to extort £800 from you is another

Hi Beamerguy,


You see how CTS LAW should not be putting the extra £60+ on top, does it change anything that it was the DRP that added the extra money on and not actually CTS LAW, although they are putting a price that is still not correct.

Lastly i found a old letter from CTS LAW saying instructed by DRP so again i have this in paper if i did go court showing that the reason a response was made as this is all false claims and caused nothing but stress and time!

DRP have just added for their own pocket.   It is the PPC who instructs CST, DRP are only the circus clowns in between and now they are gone .... back to the sewers.
DRP NEVER COULD INSTRUCT THEIR MATE because it was never their debt to do so.


You are now involved in fairy tale land, play this stupid game with them

Ed30reflex

Hi, 

update - I have now received my SAR from DVLA, on all the PCNS given from ECP, they have requested the details from DVLA as the correct procedure. 

They have done this correct but I hope it don’t change anything. 

Ed30reflex

Hi all, 

Little update. Since I received my SAR from DVLA I went through other PCNS and letters from Euro car parks in 2019 that stated I had 64 PCNS from them however only 13 are requested from DVLA via SAR evidence. So they have illegally used my details for 51 PCNS right? 

Lastly I was going through my old paperwork I kept & want to confirm a few things. I have said only I was the registered keeper of the vehicle not who was driving just that it was used for loading and unloading for work. When I appealed to POPLA they accepted 1 out of about 20 or so that all had the same writing. However POPLA say that this area/Zone does not have grace periods as it’s a no parking zone. The car wasn’t turned on obviously however it wasn’t left there to Park, and the tickets where given in the space of one minute. Do you think they will not last long in court just at the fact that they have not called the DVLA each time for my details and know I know this as I have requested a SAR and have there old papers from 2 years ago. I have attached a few pictures from ECP response recently. 

Coupon-mad

Since I received my SAR from DVLA I went through other PCNS and letters from Euro car parks in 2019 that stated I had 64 PCNS from them however only 13 are requested from DVLA via SAR evidence. So they have illegally used my details for 51 PCNS right? 

Erm, how many are on the LBC?

Do you think they will not last long in court just at the fact that they have not called the DVLA each time for my details 

They don't phone the DVLA.  It's an electronic link but if they 'only' got your data 13 times then maybe the other ones were where you appealed and they got your data from you?

KeithP

This sign that ECP have kindly sent you...


...is what's known as a forbidding sign.

It is forbidding parking.
You cannot agree a contract to do something that is forbidden.

It follows therefore that there never was a contract agreed between ECP and the driver, so their claim, that the driver broke that contract, is at best, fanciful.

Ed30reflex

Coupon-mad said:

Since I received my SAR from DVLA I went through other PCNS and letters from Euro car parks in 2019 that stated I had 64 PCNS from them however only 13 are requested from DVLA via SAR evidence. So they have illegally used my details for 51 PCNS right? 

Erm, how many are on the LBC?

Do you think they will not last long in court just at the fact that they have not called the DVLA each time for my details 

They don't phone the DVLA.  It's an electronic link but if they 'only' got your data 13 times then maybe the other ones were where you appealed and they got your data from you?

There is 13 PCN on the LBC, these PCNS show on the SAR I received. The other ones have not been requested, I didn’t respond to all of them and only around 20 or so. 

Ed30reflex

KeithP said:

This sign that ECP have kindly sent you...


...is what's known as a forbidding sign.

It is forbidding parking.
You cannot agree a contract to do something that is forbidden.

It follows therefore that there never was a contract agreed between ECP and the driver, so their claim, that the driver broke that contract, is at best, fanciful.

Exactly, in simple terms I wasn’t parked therefore wasn’t parked in a non parking zone ima short nut shell. 

I’m just curious if they want to proceed with court now that I requested SAR as they now know that in my case I am aware they followed through with around 50 or so PCNS while holding on to my Data rather then requesting the DVLA. 

KeithP

Ed30reflex said:

KeithP said:

This sign that ECP have kindly sent you...


...is what's known as a forbidding sign.

It is forbidding parking.
You cannot agree a contract to do something that is forbidden.

It follows therefore that there never was a contract agreed between ECP and the driver, so their claim, that the driver broke that contract, is at best, fanciful.

Exactly, in simple terms I wasn’t parked therefore wasn’t parked in a non parking zone ima short nut shell. 

In simple terms... you are missing the point I was trying to make.

I'm not sure how to make it clearer, but I'll try...

You do understand don't you that all this private parking fiasco is based on a contract being agreed between the parking company and the driver and the terms of that contract are displayed on the signs?

The parking company, ECP, by stating NO PARKING on the signs, are clearly are not offering a contract to any driver to park their vehicle there.

Ed30reflex

KeithP said:

Ed30reflex said:

KeithP said:

This sign that ECP have kindly sent you...


...is what's known as a forbidding sign.

It is forbidding parking.
You cannot agree a contract to do something that is forbidden.

It follows therefore that there never was a contract agreed between ECP and the driver, so their claim, that the driver broke that contract, is at best, fanciful.

Exactly, in simple terms I wasn’t parked therefore wasn’t parked in a non parking zone ima short nut shell. 

In simple terms... you are missing the point I was trying to make.

I'm not sure how to make it clearer, but I'll try...

You do understand don't you that all this private parking fiasco is based on a contract being agreed between the parking company and the driver and the terms of that contract are displayed on the signs?

The parking company, ECP, by stating NO PARKING on the signs, are clearly are not offering a contract to any driver to park their vehicle there.

In simple terms... you are missing my main point.

I thought I had elaborated however what I am trying to get at and ask, is just two things. 

1 - I know that this parking fiasco is based on contract. The signs clearly do not offer a contract by the looks of It. How do the local shops expect to receive goods from behind if you can’t load and unload. Oh yeah you can?

2 - Although there is point 1 from both sides the, Driver & ECP must follow a correct procedure to enforce and PCN the right way. Why did they send me 55 PCNS but non where logged on that they requested for my details as Per the 13PCN on the LCB. Clearly regardless if the non contract sign what broken, EPC did not follow the rules 55 times they sent a PCN while holding on to my Data what in insight is worse and would be very skeptical about me informing them face to face.