Euro Carparking Services "fore court action"

Muffinman2k

Dear Forumites,

 

Here for some help.  I have read the newbies thread several times, and sleeves are up ready to fight.

 

Car Park Operator: Euro Parking Services.  IPC Operator and thus IAS.

 

Timeline.

Received a NTK as the keeper of the vehicle that has been photographed.  Offence was in a poorly signposted car park.  The offence, the driver stayed 7 minutes.  Contravention date 24/07/23.  Issued 31/07/23.  Value £100.  What is the consideration period? Signage is non existent and car park is poor with no marked bays, which violates their own T&C.  I  returned as keeper and have images of the car park from 09/08/23.

As the keeper I appealed on 11/08/23 using the one size fits all template and the online appeal process. Note:  On speaking to locals I can not find an address for the land owner (its an ex pub carpark – pub is listed for sale and has been for 2 years plus and the car park has been managed for about 1 year and is in  a state of disrepair.

15/08/23 Appeal rejected, with what looks like cut and paste.  Advised I could appeal to IAS. Did not appeal to IAS as per advice in newbies sticky. Went on holiday and completely forgot about it.

Received a final reminder to pay on 16/09/23 giving me as keeper 28 days to pay £100 by 12/09/23.  Oh the laughs I had.

Received on 11/11/23 (posted 07/11/23) a letter from operator titled “Fore court action”  - I think this should be “Before court action” and is a failure in their shocking templates.  However it only allows 14 days and it states it will be passed to Gladstone's unless I respond with a full account + £60 so now £160 or the Name (fat chance of that) of the driver.  Again it’s a cut and paste as expected.

I don’t think this is a LBC.

  

Now the question is do I respond to this letter via email to enforcement@europarkingsercvices.com with a robust response or wait for the letter from Gladstone's and respond to that with the robust email?

Should I now also issue a SAR to dpo@europarkingservices.com to collect what is stored in preparation?

Thank you all in advance.

Muffinman.

UncleThomasCobley

It is just another debt collection letter. A real LBC/LoC must give you 30 days. Just continue to ignore.

Have a read of the PAP for debt claims that they must observe:

Pre-Action Protocol for Debt ClaimsJustice.gov.ukhttps://www.justice.gov.uk › protocols › debt-pap

Muffinman2k

Thank you.  Thought as much.  

Fruitcake

Don't send an SAR yet. Wait until after you have received a court claim, should one arrive.

Muffinman2k

Thanks I will wait till a proper LBC comes and then draft a response based on recent examples.

Coupon-mad

Thanks for posting that. Please post the back page too, of the NTK, on this thread:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6483542/a-thread-of-pictures-of-2023-parking-firm-ntks/p5

 Aha:

It's non-POFA worded - JUST EDITED THIS.

It wrongly tries to claim keeper liability on the 'day after the issue date'.  That's several days early.

Hate the idle threat against your 'employability'.  That has no place in a NTK.  Terrible.

Muffinman2k

Okay, I will take a copy of the back page and post both sides of the NTK.  I will scan/redact it for better visibility.

With it not being POFA worded that means that's another point on the case for dismissal later on citing keeper is not liable?

Coupon-mad

Yes indeed.

Grateful for that back page. That thread is already proving useful for New posters and I've shared it with the Government contacts who are shaping the statutory Code of Practice.  It's great evidence.

PremiumMembership

Hello what happen to this case as I have the same company?

Muffinman2k

Hi All,

Back for some guidance.  Its been 8 months and a LBC has shown up from Gladstones, along with some SPAM marked text messages before the LBC came.

I have scanned all the documents for completeness as the ones further up were photo's in the most. Sorry lots of images.

1 - NTK which is non-POFA as it claims keeper liability to early. (31/07/23)





2 - I appealed with one size fits all and got rejected. (15/08/23)

3 - Final Reminder with dodgy dates. (13/09/23)




4 - "Fore Court action letter"  (07/011/23)



5 - Spam text messages from Gladstones before i had a LBC - even though they claimed to have sent one.  I have lived at this address for 5+ years 

6 - LBC from gladstone's 22/7/24







Now to the questions:

1 - Driver has not been identified.
2 - Do I do a SAR? or is that not needed?

Below is of the alleged car park (photo taken the day of NTK - Its still the same) where poor signage does not make it clear that its a paid parking on entrance. Can you spot the sign    Driver was only present apparently for 7 minutes - 2 minutes over the consideration time. Should this be included? 


or do i proceed to email Gladstone's the following a modified version of the gatwick airport response.

On this note, which email address do i send it to?  The letter has a generic enquiries one but I have seen a few named people dotted around on threads. I don't want to send it to the wrong place.

LBC Response

Dear Sirs,

Your ref: xxxxxxx

I am the registered keeper but I wasn't driving the car.  Kindly revert to Euro Car Parking Services with the following:

I have researched the PoFA 2012.  Their NTK dated 31/07/23 is non-POFA worded. It wrongly claims keeper liability on the 'day after the issue date'.  That's several days early. You and your client must cancel and erase my data, as I am not the liable party and I decline their belated request to name the driver.

If you persist in processing my data and in the event of filing a court claim, take note that I will file a Part 20 counterclaim for not less than £500.  This will be claimed as damages for distress arising as a result of clear breaches of the DPA 2018 and/or the Protection From Harassment Act 1997.

I will rely upon the case of Simon Clay v Civil Enforcement Ltd and similar cases that have succeeded.  Cancel the PCN and crawl back under your respective stones forthwith.

Preferably tell your client from me to crack on with cleaning up their act to comply with the incoming statutory Code of Practice.  Groundbreaking improvements would include issuing future Notices of Parking Charge properly and engaging fairly, avoiding involving bulk litigators like you lot in this 'extorting money from motorists' model outed by the DLUHC as a market failure.

As for you: I suggest you stop obsessively reading parking forums (quoting influential MSE posters in your template WS is a constant source of amusement!) and go back to chasing shadows for phone contract and energy providers.

yours faithfully,
Keeper of Vehicle (+ Address)

Any guidance much appreciated.

Muffinman.

LDast

No idea where you get the idea that the NtK is not PoFA compliant. The wording is PoFA complaint and the date of issue is also compliant as it was deemed delivered 2 working days after which was within the required 14 days after the parking event. So, the keeper is liable if the driver is not identified.

You simply respond to the LoC with the template in the second post of the Newbies/FAQ thread with a simple denial of any debt or liability. Don’t try and alter it or add anything. The 30 day “seeking debt advice” is optional and only needed if you really do require extra time to prolong the process. You really want them to issue a claim as that is the ultimate dispute resolution process and a judge will decide whether you owe the claimant a debt or not.

You can guarantee that if/when they issue a claim, it will be flawed and easily defended.