CST Law case - Judgement made

Coupon-mad

They might try a claim but we know how to defend. No worries!

Please show a photo of that LBC as I'd like a recent CST example to use as evidence in my submission to this call for evidence:

https://committees.parliament.uk/work/7972/work-of-the-county-court/

Thanks. Need to see one this week if poss! Cover your data and the PCN reference.

lurpdog101

Here are the pages of the main letter - it then goes into the form where I can dispute it etc, followed by an income/expenditure sheet to complete, which I refuse as it is non of their business what payments I make each month. As it stands, there is sweet nothing for them anyhow, as struggling to even cover mortgage at moment! I blanked off my personal details and any info of PCN/Reference numbers...but not the amounts

Coupon-mad

lurpdog101 said:

A car park local to where my 14yr old worked over summer (being dropped off and collected by my wife each day) changed their car park overnight to be run by ocean parking.

My wife is disabled & missed the new signs.  I was not the driver.

I received 3 parking notices from ocean on the same day, demanding £100 a time for 3 occasions, where she’d waited in the car for my young son for a max of 15 mins a time.

At least 2 of those times she couldn’t get out as there are zero disabled parking bays and space between cars was very tight and not enough space for her to get out anyhow.

I wrote to them to appeal. I received a letter dated 7th October 2021 rejecting the appeal. I then received a letter dated 11th October 2021 from a debt collection agency saying they were collecting on behalf of ‘ocean and I had to pay £160 x 3!!

Within 4 days of them sending a rejection, I find debt agency adding £180 to the total.

In fact they are now after eight PCNs we knew nothing about at the time.

£480 added for no justified reason.

Here are the pages of the letter before Claim - it then goes into the form where I can dispute it etc, followed by an income/expenditure sheet to complete, which I refuse as it is none of their business what payments I make each month.

As it stands, there is sweet nothing for them anyhow, as struggling to even cover mortgage at moment!

Thanks!

The Debt Claim Pre-Action Protocol 'income/expenditure' sheets look like this (below) and are wholly inappropriate to what MPs have called 'outrageous scam' private parking cases:



The fact that bulk litigators are making a mint on the back of the 'market failure' private parking industry, needs to stop in 2024 as the DLUHC grapple to regulate them.

This LBC tells us:

1.  This is not a buffer against court. It's an enhanced rip-off threatogram designed to make as much out of consumers as possible.

2.  Once a claim is filed, these bulk litigators are believed to pocket MORE than the parking firm, because it is believed these arrangements often allow the aggressive 'legal' firm to keep the 8% interest going back up to 6 years and certainly the fake 'DRA fee' (in this case £480) and the fixed legal fee, and in some cases a % of the recovered PCN values too.

3.  At that level of rip-off, there's no incentive for bulk litigators to treat court as a last resort.  That's why parking firms likely issued half a million claims p.a. In 2023 and cause up to 450,000 CCJs (90% of claims).

4.  At LBC stage where victim consumers are caught in the 'pay up or else and by the way we want a big chunk of this pie too' trap of a bulk litigators like CST, there is ZERO attempt to offer the recipient a chance to discuss their dispute.  It is assumed to be a 'debt' and the completely inappropriate 'PAP for Debt Claims' is foisted on PCN victims.  NOTHING there sets out the facts. Nothing asks the victim Defendant to respond in order to fairly 'narrow the issues' and thus identify PCNs issued unfairly. 

5. The parking industry appear to us (and to motoring group experts) to have misled the DLUHC Select Committee in November 2021, when they (including Debt Recovery Plus - who are the same group as CST Law!) sat there with straight faces and actually told MPs that this stage is 'debt resolution'.  From what we see here on a daily basis, it is categorically NO SUCH THING and IMHO a clued-up person might well call BS at practically every utterance of supposed 'evidence' given to MPs that morning:
https://committees.parliament.uk/event/6279/formal-meeting-oral-evidence-session/

6.  This rogue approach is crying out for a bespoke 'parking pre-action protocol' to keep cases out of court.

7.  This is why the DLUHC intends to ban 'DRA fees', which feed the bulk litigators and directly encourage what is happening right now: a tsunami of meritless unfair/exaggerated claims that make up a third of all small claims and this is bringing the County Courts to its knees. 

8.  Even though the small claims track intends at its heart 'no costs' (it really wasn't ever meant for bulk litigation) and intends to cap a law firm to receive only 'fixed' legal fees of £50-£70 (for 3-figure claims) here CST have added an extortionate 8 x £60, taking an £800 'multiple unfair PCNs' case to £1280!

9.  That £480 is about three times as much as an honest high street law firm charges to write a will.  Utterly appalling that CST reckon they can add over £500 to a £800 small claim.

A LBC / LBA (same thing) can be obtained online for as little as £1.50:
Lovetts Solicitors at in £1.50 per LBA

10.  This eye-watering £480 add-on, in turn has the effect of enhancing the fixed legal fee which then falls into a higher level and makes the bulk litigator a bit more (Jeez they are greedy):

Fixed legal fees recoverable in small claim:

£50 for claims up to £500
£70 for claims from £500 to £1000
£80 for claims over £1000


AND on top of that, the bulk litigators must be invoicing the PPC for VAT on top of the DRA fee element, thus the 'Parking legal firms' must banking even more money than we thought, as their lucrative 'reward' for litigation.

Debt recovery fees are subject to VAT:

"Supply and liability

The service supplied by a debt collection agency is a single composite supply, the core of which is debt collection.

Debt collection is specifically excluded from the finance exemption, and is thus taxable."

https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/vat-finance-manual/vatfin3255

In your case this MUST mean (if they are acting lawfully...) they are also - behind the scenes - adding 20% of £480 = an extra £96.

And I believe that the PPC can them claim VAT relief on that element under HMRC 'bad debt' rules.

So...isn't the public purse effectively paying £98 to encourage and line the pockets of CST Law, in your case?

Multiply that by half a million claims, about half of which are multi-PCN cases according to DRP/Credit Style (aka CST Law).

Hmmmm...

Either that, or some of the firms possibly aren't paying VAT when they should...

Or:

...possibly the added £60 includes VAT, in which case the consumer is paying the PPC's VAT ... which HMRC have clarified is not allowed.

I will be asking HMRC about all this.

raislander

Hi I'm in the same boat as you, I got a LBC from CST Law, see attached. I read the instructions in the NEWBIE page but I don't see any email in their letter to reply? Should I reply by POST instead?

I'd appreciate any input on how to proceed as this is the 1st time I have to face this. The PCN is from Stansted infamous parking at McDonalds. 

lurpdog101

@Coupon-mad many thanks - yes, £480 added on for the DCA fees - I had looked it up last year to see that DRA and CST Law were the same firm. 

As mentioned, I received an LBC last June (2022) and responded to it....with their reply coming in October. I have since then heard nothing at all until this came through, so I am doubting they will take it to court now either, and with the fact they have added so much more than the £70, tells me I would have a strong case.

Do I need to respond to this LBC or not? As said, the remainder of it was the form to complete, to admit the amount, or dispute it with reason why. 

Coupon-mad

I'd reply if only to wind the eejits up!

Surely there's an email for this bunch on other threads, or on their website? Don't waste a stamp.

lurpdog101

Hi all @Coupon-mad

Hope everyone had nice Christmas. I just had a County Court Summons end up through my door for the amount of £1710 (£1515 amount claimed) plus £195 of court charges on top. I am distraught.. all of this for £8. 

Breakdown: 
£1280 for monies relating to parking charges
£235.03 pursuant to s69 of County CourtvAct at rate of 8% p.a from 12/09/21 to date
Interest hereon in at the same rate until judgement or sooner payment at the daily rate of £0.28

I don't know what to do. I am barely able to keep roof over head of my family as it is, as single income, with my wife unable to work for many years now, due to illness. This is going to tip me over the edge. She didn't pay as was in for between 5-15 minutes a time, she did not see any signs, but when did go back, they are absolutely tiny and cannot be read unless 6" in front, and being disabled, she couldn't get out anyhow, as no disabled spaces (which I know is not a legal requirement to have any) 

What can I do??? This has been going on for 3 years, they have knocked back 2 appeals and then didn't contact me from January until November this year.

Coupon-mad

Simple!  You don't have a Summons.

Easy to defend using our template defence.  The NEWBIES Thread 2nd post explains.

Show us the claim form, covering your data, VRM, claim number and the MCOL password.

lurpdog101

thanks. I am so stressed right now. 

Le_Kirk

As @Coupon-mad writes, just defend using the @hharry100 defence for sparse particulars. Make sure you do the AOS 5 days after the issue date to buy yourself maximum time available.