ECP overstay parking charge

Coupon-mad

I don't really see it - but you can use ECP's complaints procedure to complain that this was never received, then that procedure lets you complain to the BPA.

B789

Unfortunately, what they have sent you is not the email including the headers. They have just forwarded to you what they claim they have sent without any proof. They are trying to male bovine excrement you.

You should respond to their DPO that if they are unable to provide the requested information, then they should seek the assistance of their IT department. Without the requested sent email headers, you will be pointing out to the court that they have made an untrue statement as they did not send the email or they are refusing to provide the available evidence that they did.

A header from a sent email should look something like this:

Return-Path: <john@doe.com>
Received: from smtpclient.apple (wnpgmb016qw-ds01-45-2-18.dynamic.bellmts.net. [234.17.12.33])
        by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b25-20020a05620a119900b00765ab6d3e81sm2584109qkk.122.2023.07.23.14.44.37
        for <john@doe.com>
        (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128);
        Sun, 23 Jul 2023 14:44:37 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: John Doe <john@doe.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2023 16:44:26 -0500
Subject: Test subject
Message-Id: <558ACD8C-4A16-43F2-8783-4BCAF361BAA5@doe.com>
To: John Doe <john@doe.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (20F75)

3EE29D11D9FD

The actual email address sent from and to has been altered as has the IP address.

The "Return-Path" is the email address that it was sent FROM.

The "Received" information is what your email system would ave provided to their system. This is vital to prove that they actually did send the email.

The "Date" is the date and time it was sent and the rest is fairly self explanatory. 

The "X-Mailer" is the mail agent/device used to send the message.

Horus_lupercal

B789 said:

Unfortunately, what they have sent you is not the email including the headers. They have just forwarded to you what they claim they have sent without any proof. They are trying to male bovine excrement you.

You should respond to their DPO that if they are unable to provide the requested information, then they should seek the assistance of their IT department. Without the requested sent email headers, you will be pointing out to the court that they have made an untrue statement as they did not send the email or they are refusing to provide the available evidence that they did.

A header from a sent email should look something like this:

Return-Path: <john@doe.com>
Received: from smtpclient.apple (wnpgmb016qw-ds01-45-2-18.dynamic.bellmts.net. [234.17.12.33])
        by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b25-20020a05620a119900b00765ab6d3e81sm2584109qkk.122.2023.07.23.14.44.37
        for <john@doe.com>
        (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128);
        Sun, 23 Jul 2023 14:44:37 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: John Doe <john@doe.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2023 16:44:26 -0500
Subject: Test subject
Message-Id: <558ACD8C-4A16-43F2-8783-4BCAF361BAA5@doe.com>
To: John Doe <john@doe.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (20F75)

3EE29D11D9FD

The actual email address sent from and to has been altered as has the IP address.

The "Return-Path" is the email address that it was sent FROM.

The "Received" information is what your email system would ave provided to their system. This is vital to prove that they actually did send the email.

The "Date" is the date and time it was sent and the rest is fairly self explanatory. 

The "X-Mailer" is the mail agent/device used to send the message.

Great, this is what I needed. I'm not really tech savvy enough to know what you were getting at before, although I could tell that the files they sent werent really passing muster. Ok, I'll get back to them along these lines and see what happens.

Horus_lupercal

So ecp have sent me the stuff from the SAR I put in. It's the usual stuff, nothing new.

Not received anything on the email proof front. My plan now was to just wait out. Would anyone recommend anything else? Pushing for a new POPLA code or something?

Horus_lupercal

Hi all. Update on this. Received a claim today.
Have acknowledged on mcol as per the instructions. 

However, upon attempting to send my defence to the email in the instructions I am getting undeliverable returns from the email. Does anyone know if the email has changed, and if so what it is now?

Thanks.

Gr1pr

Too early for any defence submission 

Just login to MCOL and complete the AOS online,  unless you managed that task today 

Post the issue date from the claim form plus a redacted picture of the POC on the lower left of the claim form after hiding the VRM details first 

Post your proposed paragraphs 2 & 3 below 

Post the email address details that you sent the undeliverable email to as well 

Horus_lupercal

Ah I was being an idiot. I managed to send in the end. Hang on, I can post the paragraphs but they're on my work computer.

Issue date is 27/05

Horus_lupercal

please see below for my paras 2 & 3

2. The facts in this defence come from the Defendant's own knowledge and honest belief.  Conversely, the Claimant sets out a cut-and-paste incoherent and sparse statement of case. The POC appear to be in breach of CPR 16.4, 16PD3 and 16PD7, and fail to "state all facts necessary for the purpose of formulating a complete cause of action". The Defendant is unable, based on the POC, to understand with certainty what case, allegation(s) and what heads of cost are being pursued, making it difficult to respond. However, the vehicle is recognised, and it is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper.

3. On the 10 April 2023, the driver parked the vehicle in North Place Cheltenham, GL50 4DW, around the time of 10:55 am, and purchased a ticket covering 2 hours. After spending a period of time in Cheltenham, the driver then returned to the vehicle and left the car park, around the time of 13:00 pm.

On the 20 April 2023, the defendant received PCN Ref:88886234137, and subsequently lodged an appeal through the Euro Car Parks (ECP) LTD website, whereupon they were informed that a response would be forthcoming within 30 days.

On 20 July 2023, the defendant received a ‘Final Notification Letter’ (Doc 1) from ECP. No correspondence had been received by the defendant between these 2 dates, either via mail or email. The defendant then contacted ECP to complain about this circumstance, whereupon they were informed that their appeal had been rejected (and a POPLA code issued) on 24 May 23. The defendant informed ECP that this appeal rejection had not been received either via letter or email, and requested proof of sending, specifying an email header and/or an image of the email in a sent folder. ECP sent a screenshot of an email they claim was sent to the defendant on the date above. The defendant finds the screenshot to be inadequate proof of the rejection email being sent, and repeated their requests to ECP for proof, which were met first with the same screenshot, and then nothing.

With the POPLA code expired, the defendant was left with no further recourse available regarding the claim.

The defendant claims ECP to be in breach of BPA (British Parking Association) Code of Practice, specifically: Section B, Paragraph 23.8: ‘You Must acknowledge or reply to the appeal within 14 days of receiving it. If at first you only acknowledge the appeal, or your reply does not fully resolve it, normally we would expect you to seek the additional information you require from the motorist and accept or reject the appeal in writing not more than 35 days after the information required to resolve it has been received from the motorist.’ As no acknowledgement of the appeal was made within 14 days from 23 April 2023. AND Section B, Paragraph 23.12: If you reject an appeal you must: Tell the motorist how to make an appeal to IAS. This includes providing a template ‘notice of appeal’ form or a link to the appropriate website and a valid 10 digit verification code. Even if the verification code is printed on an enclosed appeal form, it must still be in a prominent position on the first page of the rejection letter.’ AND Section B, Paragraph 23.6: ‘When you receive an appeal, you must stop work on processing the charge immediately. You must not increase the charge until you have replied to the appeal.’ As no evidence of the rejection was provided to the defendant.

 

The defendant has recorded and filed all documents relating to these interactions from both parties to provide evidence for their statement.

Horus_lupercal

I drafted this all up last year in preparation for this dance. I've done my homework and am pretty confident to go forward.

I also drafted a letter before claim response, but I'm assuming that's redundant seeing as I didn't get a letter before claim?

Am I right to think that a questionnaire is the next thing to expect?

Gr1pr

So you haven't addressed the POC which I asked for the redacted picture of earlier,  your paragraph 3 is nothing like the recent ones over the last 6 to 8 weeks,  and paragraph 2 has no ending,  compare yours to the following ones in this thread below 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6567118/euro-car-parks-dcb-legal-2025-defence-to-old-debt-claim#latest

And

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6605457/dcb-legal-for-euro-car-parks-cnbc-claim-form#latest

No exhibits are sent with the defence,  but you mentioned doc1 

Seems to me to be too much detail at this early stage, but as you have sent it already,  you are stuck with it,  whereas you had to almost the end of june if you had waited for our help and advice,  there was no need to rush 

The 12 steps explain what happens and when , including the DQ stage 

Yes the LoC response etc is redundant,  not needed