PCM Ticket x2 for parking in an allocated park space - Mortgage on the Flat

D_P_Dance

 I did phone the parking "company" 

Never ever 'phone a PPC, EVERYTHING in writing

Chippyshell

D_P_Dance said:

 I did phone the parking "company" 

Never ever 'phone a PPC, EVERYTHING in writing

I will wait for LBC 

Coupon-mad

Never ring a PPC and never contact a DCA about a Private PCN.

Can you show here your entire letter and text chain from Trace, please?  I am complaining about them.   Redact your address and PCN refs of course.

They use letter-heading signed misleadingly 'Litigation Manager' that appears to show they are writing from a 'Legal Department' (scales of justice logo) and are holding themselves out to be following the pre-action protocol and that litigation is imminent in 14 days.  All this is not true, misleading and impossible because the PAP doesn't allow a 14 day deadline and (unless they have a supervising solicitor) Trace can't conduct litigation for clients.

Their texts/emails in the chain, as well as the letters in a non-blurry photo or scan here, would be useful evidence for my complaint about them which has gone to the Trade Bodies and beyond.

Chippyshell

Coupon-mad said:

Never ring a PPC and never contact a DCA about a Private PCN.

Can you show here your entire letter and text chain from Trace, please?  I am complaining about them.   Redact your address and PCN refs of course.

They use letter-heading signed misleadingly 'Litigation Manager' that appears to show they are writing from a 'Legal Department' (scales of justice logo) and are holding themselves out to be following the pre-action protocol and that litigation is imminent in 14 days.  All this is not true, misleading and impossible because the PAP doesn't allow a 14 day deadline and (unless they have a supervising solicitor) Trace can't conduct litigation for clients.

Their texts/emails in the chain, as well as the letters in a non-blurry photo or scan here, would be useful evidence for my complaint about them which has gone to the Trade Bodies and beyond.

Hi mate, check your DM i sent you it across a while ago, if I get any more I will send them over. I do have some emails from the customer service just saying my payment is due etc.. 

Chippyshell

Still waiting for the court letter from trace debt recovery.

Received another letter today will send it across to you @Coupon-mad

Jenni_D

Be careful as @Coupon-mad sometimes closes off her PM Inbox, or restricts who can send her PMs.

If you're able to redact personal details and post them here in a reply that may be helpful.

Chippyshell

Jenni_D said:

Be careful as @Coupon-mad sometimes closes off her PM Inbox, or restricts who can send her PMs.

If you're able to redact personal details and post them here in a reply that may be helpful.

No worries i will post below

Jenni_D

Perfect - I think that's exactly what @Coupon-mad was looking for; and if I open the image in a new tab it's a good size and clear.  

Coupon-mad

Yes, I can open that in a new tab and see it clearly.  I can use that as part of an email I am sending...

D_P_Dance

They have added what appears to be an extra unlawful amount 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