Received a Letter Before Claim from SIP as claimant and solicitor

ScammingIndustry

I have recently received a LBC for multiple parking charges I have received from 2020 onwards. Letter Before Claim is a very vague letter consisting of one page with information about PCN overleaf.

I have received LBC letter on 26/04/2022 demanding £800 for 8 PCN's for various reasons. Upon reading the updated thread I will be sending a SAR notice.

On the LBC, it states the claimant has followed correct procedure stated out in paragraph 4 of PAP

Is this the correct procedure? 

Coupon-mad

received LBC letter on 26/04/2022 demanding £800 for 8 PCN's.

Did they add no fake costs? That's actually good.

SIP do their own court claims and for this sum of money they will proceed.

So what's your defence?  You must respond to narrow the issues and show them evidence now (e.g. the rights under your lease, if this is about where you live).  Is it?  Are you a tenant or a leaseholder?

ScammingIndustry

I haven't a clue whether they have added any surcharge. Private parking is nearby my workplace and have plenty of evidence to suggest that signage rules have been broken and the payment on the website does not work therefore cannot pay for the ticket. I have evidence of this.

Moreover, the parking space had 2 entrances. One looked very illegal as no dropped pavements either. First few PCN are without ANPR since then they have started using ANPR and issued me with manual parking charge notice

Coupon-mad

I haven't a clue whether they have added any surcharge.

You do, because the PCN is £100 a time and you said they are 'only' asking for that and no added fake debt recovery costs.

Do you mean that you and colleagues were using an unrelated private car park sometimes to leave your car while you went to work?  Sounds like trespass to me (in fact this is why landowners call in parking firms) and I 'm not sure a Judge would be with you unless you had authorisation to park there?

ScammingIndustry

To make things clear yes it's £100 a PCN so from what you are saying I gather there's no fake costs involved. From my point of view, I have paid for those parking other times. The times I have not paid has been due to the fact that their online hasn't worked and I've gone over the "grace period" and it's still not working as checked yesterday. It just gives me an error.

I also believe the LBC does not thoroughly follow practice directions

Coupon-mad

I also believe the LBC does not thoroughly follow practice directions.

That won't be a defence and a Judge will think it's good enough, if it gives you 30 days and access to reply forms.

Sounds like you have a defence if there was no other payment method, and the signs didn't make it clear that if you cannot pay, you must leave and not park.

You heed to respond and say this and show proof of all the other times you paid (to prove you are not a serial trespasser).

Don't use a template reply about the PAP.  Reply honestly with your position.

ScammingIndustry

Thank you for clearing it up for me. Should I reply to the access form to continue with my defence? 

Would it affect me in any way if they were to reject my defence or do I have more options after that?

ScammingIndustry

In addition, a key point I have missed out on. The pay and display tariff show for 12 hours, it costs £4. However, on the machine it always charges me more than £4 for 12 hours. I think that's what had mislead many people into believing this is not a proper run car park

Coupon-mad

If you use the reply form, NO FILLING IN THE FINANCIAL QUESTIONS THAT ASSUME A DEBT IS DUE.

We'd say just send a letter and get a free Certificate of Posting from the PO Counter.  Not 'signed for'.  Keep the proof of posting stapled to a copy of your response letter.

ScammingIndustry

I am attaching a picture of paid parking ticket which shows the wrong charges and also the wrong street name. The street name concerning in the ticket brought from SIP car park refers to me paying for a car park in Bridgewater st (Manchester). I will also attach a picture of the actual car park which shows street name. whatever SIP are doing are completely

ScammingIndustry

PleaseCoupon-mad said:

If you use the reply form, NO FILLING IN THE FINANCIAL QUESTIONS THAT ASSUME A DEBT IS DUE.

We'd say just send a letter and get a free Certificate of Posting from the PO Counter.  Not 'signed for'.  Keep the proof of posting stapled to a copy of your response letter.

I have drafted up a letter in response to this.

I have all the evidence as well to support the claims. Do you think this is a good response to LBC

I appreciate the help I am receiving for this!

--------

Email address: (Mines)

I am writing to formally request a subject access request (SAR), as you are the acting authority I would also request to put a hold on the process of CCJ for Subject access request.

I have received multiple PCN's for "No parking ticket displayed" or "Vehicle not permitted, grace period exceeded". I, hereby, providing evidence along with this letter to believe these charges are very unfair and misleading.

Firstly, the car park concerning these tickets is located, on Crane Street, Leicester. I have been a customer of yours for couple of years, buying tickets every time I use the car park space. I have physical copy of almost every display ticket I have purchased from Crane Street. The times you have charged me is due to malfunctions in the system of online payment, whereby the system does not recognise the time and it comes with an error (see evidence) and thus unable to make purchase of the ticket. This is normally my preference of buying ticket because for no reason at all it is cheaper to buy a ticket on the website (of SIP) than through the pay and display machine. However, after multiple attempts, I grew tired of having the same issue and consequences. Therefore, I chose to use the pay and display machine (also malfunctioned) every now and then when I used the car park space. Moreover, upon using the pay and display machine, I had come to a realisation that through no fault of my own, I have having to pay more (see evidence of parking tickets) through the pay and display machine which contradicts the terms and conditions (and the apparant contract I have not agreed to) I am bound to for using the parking space. This is another reason why my preference is online payment as the signs and the contracts at the site are clearly misleading and conning the users of the car park.

Moreover, the tariff on display clearly states £4 for 12 hours of parking but the attached evidence of tickets will show SIP have been charging more than they should have which is a clear fraud and another misleading signage posted in the car park. In addition, the parking tickets I have been purchasing shows, it is for a SIP car park located in Bridgewater Street, Manchester which suggests that the machine is also malfunctioned. This is a very dangerous practice as this is a plausible cause for my insurers to void my insurance and leave me empty pockets if any situation arises within the car park. I would not be able to provide evidence of parking in Crane Street, Leicester as the ticket shows a different location.

Moreover, different methods of payments shown on the signage incur additional charges for using car park which I believe is also unjustifiable for e.g. it costs 40p more to use "PayByPhone". This is a very unfair practice and seem like a deliberate ploy by the car parking company to charge customers more. Additionally, the car park signage does not state to leave the car park if no payment is made in the event of an issue with the payment in accordance with Private parking code of practice nor does it give a number to call if there is a problem with the machine (see "Paragraph 6. Payment of a parking tariff" in Private parking code of practice below).

Private parking Code of Practice - 07/02/2022
[Link to the website]

Also, the signage or lack of, are very small and are barely legible around the car park. (See evidence)

To conclude, all the evidence points that this car park runs a very bad practice especially when it comes to signage as it does not correspond to the terms and conditions (and the contract which I have not agreed to) shown on the signage. It also charges customers more than it should as shown on the signage and also the tickets issued are all for a wrong location which shows clear malfunction in the system. Also, the online system is very temperamental and does not allow the transactions to go through thus resorting paying more which is against the tariff shown on the signage.

Please read the letter and see evidence attached.

Should this go to court, I have gathered all the evidence which shows bad practice, fraud and, clearly misleads those who use the car park.

I hope to reach a solution that would save time and costs of court proceedings.

For this reason, I look forward to receiving notification within 28 days that the Parking Charge Notices have been cancelled.

Yours faithfully,

(Removed by Forum Team)