CST Law case - Judgement made

lurpdog101

Umkomaas said:

Unless it's marked up as 'Letter Before/Of Claim', then ignore it. Scaremongering jacking up of the charge into Monopoly Money. At that level you could buy yourself a tank of petrol! 😁

Ah thanks. It’s only headed as “unpaid debt reminder notice” so I’ll ignore it 

😂😂 you’re not wrong! I put £10 in yesterday on pump 5 and had enough to get me to pump 6 😀

D_P_Dance

It is only a debt if a judge says it is, uunttil then it is an alleged debt.  From what you have told us, if they do go t court they are likely to struggle.

MO yhat number of letters from a DCA is harassment and, if the  PPC  take you to court, you should consider a counter claim.  Have you complained to your MP?  

lurpdog101

Just for some extra info, as I’m formulating my letter to MP to go off today ..attached is redacted copy of the last letter sent by ocean parking. Please note this is 3 weeks AFTER the DCA started chasing me for £160 per “charge”. I have never had a letter from Ocean parking stating they have sold the alleged debt or passed it to a DCA to manage. 

Also attached some photos of the signs which had gone up overnight and also the entire car park, showing no disabled bays…these photos taken yesterday as I decided to go and check if they’d added any special bays since my first raising it 6 months ago, they haven’t…which is in my favour. The signs are in Welsh and English, but not on same sign, one Welsh, then have to walk to another part of car park if want to read it in English! Difficult if disabled and can’t really get out the car as no room when car park full

Coupon-mad

 I have never had a letter from Ocean parking stating they have sold the alleged debt or passed it to a DCA to manage. 

That's because they haven't sold it on and don't need to warn you that they are just using a DRA to send some desperate chaser letters that you can ignore.

D_P_Dance

They have added what appears to be an extra unlawful amount for debt collection.

This amounts to double recovery and Judges all over the country are dismissing these spurious additions. Indeed some judges have dismissed entire claims because of this. Read this and complain to Trading Standards and 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 Excel v Wilkinson.pdf?dl=0

However, VCS appealed this so it may not apply in all cases, read this

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ntksx9g7177ahyg/VCS v Percy v1 Amendments (2).pdf?dl=0Also read this

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6279348/witness-statements-2-transcripts-re-parking-firms-false-costs-recorder-cohen-qc-judgment-2021/p1

Also this,

"Abuse of process – the quantum

13. In addition to the disputed Parking Charge Notice claim amount of £100, the Claimant has added a sum of £60 that is disingenuously described variously as 'debt collection costs', ‘additional charges levied to cover the cost of recovery’, ‘additional administration costs’, ‘debt recovery costs’, ‘initial legal costs’ and ‘recovery costs’. The added £60 constitutes double recovery and the court is invited to find the quantum claimed is false and an abuse of process as was found by District Judge Claire Jackson (now HHJ Jackson, a Specialist Civil Circuit Judge) in Excel vs Wilkinson: G4QZ465V, a similar case in which £60 had been added to a parking charge, heard in July 2020 (the transcript of which is exhibit XX-04). The Judge concluded that such claims are proceedings with 'an improper collateral purpose'. Leave to appeal was refused and that route was not pursued."

Consider complaining to The SRA about the solicitor, if one is involved They are fully aware of the unlawful nature of most of thse additions, which are nvariabky disallowed by the judge, yet persist in adding them..

https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/problems/

lurpdog101

Thanks again all. I have written to the MP over this now.

as an extra addition to this farce, after receiving the letter from “CST Law” last week demanding £800, I have received 3 further letters from the DCA with no mention of £800, but wanting their £160 x 3!! 

Completely proves all your points. I have kept all letters and between the 1st contact by them on 24th august, until 7th October, I received a total of 10 letters from Ocean Parking including their appeal rejection. 10 letters in 6 weeks. 

Between 7th October and today (6 months) I have received the following:
- 3 further reminders from Ocean Parking requesting I pay £300
- 30 letters from the DCA requesting I pay  £480 or face court

- 1 letter from “law/‘ firm demanding £800 as will have a CCJ which they specified will have serious damage on me personally. 

That averages 1.5 letters a week, non stop. 

Fruitcake

If CST say they are acting on behalf of DRP, then they are debt powerless collectors acting on behalf of powerless debt collectors.

Do you, or do you know anyone who speaks Welsh who could translate the signs to ensure it matches exactly the same Ts and Cs as the ones in English?
According to four separate online translation websites, DIRWY BARCIO means PARKING FINE. It would be worth getting that properly translated by a Welsh speaker because use of the word Fine is prohibited.

The BPA CoP has a section about "bedding in" where signs must be put up warning that changes will be made in the future, and give the date when the changes will begin.

lurpdog101

Thanks….the English translation is “tariff” on the sign at least. They mention charge a few times but not fine. 

Yes, the DCA just sends the same worded letter each time, well, 2 versions, but just change the due date each time. 

w times but 

Coupon-mad

lurpdog101 said:

Thanks again all. I have written to the MP over this now.

as an extra addition to this farce, after receiving the letter from “CST Law” last week demanding £800, I have received 3 further letters from the DCA with no mention of £800, but wanting their £160 x 3!! 

Please show that letter. This is new!

What the heck are they playing at?!  I need to have a word with someone to nip this in the bud.

Fruitcake

lurpdog101 said:

Thanks….the English translation is “tariff” on the sign at least. They mention charge a few times but not fine. 

Yes, the DCA just sends the same worded letter each time, well, 2 versions, but just change the due date each time. 

w times but 

A complaint needs to go to Ocean, and the BPA, and your MP, copied to the MP of the location if different, that the prohibited word DIRWY, meaning FINE, has been used on the Welsh language signs.
That is a misrepresentation of authority, and a breach of the BPA CoP.