Excel Parking CCBC Claim Form - What next?

Snakes_Belly

Sazzy61 said:

Snakes_Belly said:

£330! is this one PCN? 

Yes its just one one PCN.
It started off as £1 to park in their poxy car park and has ballooned into this absurd amount.

Greed on a criminal scale !

How have they broke that down?   It is greed. They are a vile company but can be beaten.  Have you by any chance still kept your ticket?  I realise it is from a long time ago.

1505grandad

A reminder that there is already a thread about this Excel case which may have relevant information  -  for instance:-

"Once I get the info from the SAR request, what am I supposed to do with it all?  How does any of it (whatever it is) help me?"

Was the SAR data received from Excel?

May be helpful if the OP contacts Board Guides for the two threads to be amalgamated.

Sazzy61

Snakes_Belly said:

Sazzy61 said:

Snakes_Belly said:

£330! is this one PCN? 

Yes its just one one PCN.
It started off as £1 to park in their poxy car park and has ballooned into this absurd amount.

Greed on a criminal scale !

How have they broke that down?   It is greed. They are a vile company but can be beaten.  Have you by any chance still kept your ticket?  I realise it is from a long time ago.

Yes I still have the original ticket; I have every piece of correspondence issues win connection with this case, including at least 4 different 'legal' companies who handled at one time or another.
The current breakdown is aa claim amount of £245.64, court fees £35, legal representative's costs £50.
Grand total: £330.64.

I'd have to dig a bit deeper to find the logic by which they arrived at a claim amount of £245 though, but I have it all filed away.

Coupon-mad

I suspect a stupid amount of interest as a 'reward' for spending years harassing you instead of filing a claim if they thought they had a cause of action.

Plus the now-banned fake DRA fee, that Neil O'Brien MP at the DLUHC called 'designed to extort money from motorists'.

But they'll carry on extorting that money all the time the can is allowed to be kicked down the road during the Code implementation phase.  They need stopping.

Snakes_Belly

Sazzy61 said:

Snakes_Belly said:

Sazzy61 said:

Snakes_Belly said:

£330! is this one PCN? 

Yes its just one one PCN.
It started off as £1 to park in their poxy car park and has ballooned into this absurd amount.

Greed on a criminal scale !

How have they broke that down?   It is greed. They are a vile company but can be beaten.  Have you by any chance still kept your ticket?  I realise it is from a long time ago.

Yes I still have the original ticket; I have every piece of correspondence issues win connection with this case, including at least 4 different 'legal' companies who handled at one time or another.
The current breakdown is aa claim amount of £245.64, court fees £35, legal representative's costs £50.
Grand total: £330.64.

I'd have to dig a bit deeper to find the logic by which they arrived at a claim amount of £245 though, but I have it all filed away.

The £245.00 as CM says is probably a debt collection charge, interest and the original claim. It still seems high though. 

Going to court is a lottery and you can never be certain of the outcome. You do have certain facts in your favour. Firstly you have paid and have evidence of that. The signage was not good. The transgression was minor (de minimis). Then there is the length of time it has taken. Why has it taken that long? This is a very litigious company that regularly pursue these claims through the courts.   

Judges do tend to take the side of defendants that have paid as you have met the consideration element of the contract. You have not disadvantaged another driver.

This is just an observation and not a criticism but when you write your defence I would perhaps reword your comments regarding input of your REG number.  Something like, I had recently bought a new vehicle and I may have made an error in keying in the new registration number or ignore it unless asked. It's a very minor issue. 

If I was to predict how this will play I think that they will make an offer which I am assuming you will refuse and then they could pull at the last minute. They have done this before.  

Snakes_Belly

Who were the debt collectors? If any of the letters came from DRP or Zenith then they don't pay them. They work on a no collection no fee basis.  

This is the now-banned fake DRA fee, that Neil O'Brien MP at the DLUHC called 'designed to extort money from motorists'.

Excel are still trying on this scam. This claim is unreasonable behaviour and I think that you would be in your rights to claim costs for unreasonable behaviour. 

Sazzy61

Snakes_Belly said:

Who were the debt collectors? If any of the letters came from DRP or Zenith then they don't pay them. They work on a no collection no fee basis.  

This is the now-banned fake DRA fee, that Neil O'Brien MP at the DLUHC called 'designed to extort money from motorists'.

Excel are still trying on this scam. This claim is unreasonable behaviour and I think that you would be in your rights to claim costs for unreasonable behaviour. 

Over the years there have been several firms involved as the claim has been passed around. Obviously, the worry of this over the past six years of this has taken its toll on me. Further, being self employed means that every hour I spend dealing with this is a further financial loss to me, and all this makes me wonder if I have a further claim for costs. So far though, I haven't added anything to the 'costs' section at the end of my defence template submission.

But to answer your question, the collectors involved at various times are:
ZPS, Wright Hassall, BW Legal and DCB Legal.

Sazzy61

OK, I have completed my defence document to the best of my ability.  Using the template provided in the Newbies thread, I have added my own explanation in my own words, highlighted in the attached screenshot.
I haven't changed or edited or removed anything else in the entire template though; I have read it all through, and can't spot anything that isn't relevant.
Any comments or amendments before I fire this off in an email would be gratefully received....

 

KeithP

Generally Defences are written in the third person - no use of the word 'I'.

So the start of your para 3 could become...
3. The vehicle entered the car park...

Next sentence could start...
The vehicle was parked...

etc.

Or something like that.

Sazzy61

KeithP said:

Generally Defences are written in the third person - no use of the word 'I'.

So the start of your para 3 could become...
3. The vehicle entered the car park...

Next sentence could start...
The vehicle was parked...

etc.

Or something like that.

Ah, OK thanks. I don't really understand the nuances of 'legalese', so I'll fix that, ta.
I just sort of assumed that 'In your own words' meant exactly that, but if this is what it takes to get the job done, I'm on it!