Letter before court action - help respectfully requested

Cloth101

Hi there. 

I have read the Newbies thread several times, and I am aware of the next steps I should take if I want to fight this parking ticket. I’ve come to ask if someone could give me some advice on wether to do so? 

The story:

October 2020, my partner and I parked in a car park. We paid for our parking using RingGo. We went for dinner. We have a young child and this was our first evening out together. We’re also new fo the area and as a result we’d never parked at night in this car park before. 

During the evening I get a message on my phone that the parking was about to expire. I check the app to see whether the parking is free after a certain time. I believe it was about 8.20pm at this point. The app says that the chargeable times are ‘8 am - 8 pm’. Oh great. I don’t buy another hour. 

40 minutes later we leave. 

20 odd days later we get a ticket through the post. 

I check the app and try to work out what’s happened. The car park, as it turns out, IS chargeable 24 hours a day, but the way it was structured on the app was: 8 am - 8 pm and then 8 pm - 8 am. To me, at the time, this was entirely unclear. Other car parks usually just say ‘24 hours’. We would have paid if we had realised. It was an honest mistake.

I googled when we received the fine. Apparently the fine should be issued with 10 or 14 days (I can’t remember which, but it was definitely longer than this). The whole thing seemed like a sham. Coupled with an exceedingly stressful time at home with ill family members we ignored it. 

The other day we received the letter before action. They want £160 or they’ll take us to court.

I’m aware that the next step is a SARS request, but I am wondering what the point is? Is this a hopeless case? The fact the fine was issued late seems fine be on our side but will that count for anything if if goes to court? Can I write to these people and tell them to get lost? 

For context: the car was my partner’s car but I handled the payment for parking.

Many thanks for reading. 

Redx

It's not a fine , it's a parking charge notice , PCN , an invoice , not a fine 

No they won't get lost

Name the parking company below

Who sent the LBC ??

The SAR reply is to obtain all documents and pictures etc , all your data

The 30 days notice holding reply is to buy time to obtain the SAR reply , to be used in your WS against a court claim in the future ( these companies do sue people )

The keeper will receive the court claim and must defend it , in court , before a judge

The parking company do not have to comply with POFA , so the 14 days notice is irrelevant , POFA is not mandatory , so they had 6 months to obtain the keeper data , and one month to get the PCN to that Keeper , so 7 months in total

Cloth101

Hi Redx, 

Thank you for your reply. 

The company is Ipserv. They’re using BW Legal as their solicitors, and they sent the LBC. 

Damn, I didn’t realise about the 14 days.

patient_dream

Who is the parking company and who issued a letter before claim

You DO NOT owe £160, they have added a fake charge

Redx

Did the B W Legal LBC include financial forms and give 30 days notice ?

Email a SAR to the DPO at Ipserve

Read the Ipserve saga in another thread on here , it may be helpful

Cloth101

Yes, they included reply forms asking for our financial information and gave 30 days. 

Is there a way to find the thread you mention? 

Cloth101

patient_dream said:

You DO NOT owe £160, they have added a fake charge

Can you elaborate on what a ‘fake charge’ is, please? 

Redx

Cloth101 said:

Yes, they included reply forms asking for our financial information and gave 30 days. 

Is there a way to find the thread you mention? 

We are on page 1 , it's near the top of page 2 at the moment

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6283452/car-parking-charges-and-false-information-from-ipserv-ltd/p1

patient_dream

Cloth101 said:

patient_dream said:

You DO NOT owe £160, they have added a fake charge

Can you elaborate on what a ‘fake charge’ is, please? 

The other thread is ..
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6283452/car-parking-charges-and-false-information-from-ipserv-ltd/p1

These legals add on a fake amount, in your case it's £60
They normally give a rubbish reason which the courts do not like

This is another parking company but the same still applies
EXCEL v WILKINSON ..... claim 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

Further reading where BWLegal get spanked in court
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6014081/abuse-of-process-district-judge-tells-bwlegal/p1?new=1

To understand this, it relates back to the Supreme court.
You can watch the video from the Supreme court by reading the post dated 6th May
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/78306189#Comment_78306189

patient_dream

Sorry for duplcate info, Redx and myself are posting at the same time.
Over to Redx

Redx

The £100 PCN charge never changes , it remains at £100

The claimant can claim around £100 in Court claim fees and legal fees if it goes to a court hearing

So the £60 is fake , they added an admin fee to the £100 PCN charge , disputed in the Wilkinson case and the Recorder Cohen judgment , look them up