Not sure which approach we should have to this BW Legal letter

Coupon-mad

What are the rules for Private land? 

I can't even begin to answer that. No time!

I would remove the bit about the 'PCN being void' but keep this at the end:

"therefore so do not pursue us for any debt collection relating to it."

But where's your final part - setting out what you want from them and making it timebound? 

lola-909

final draft - this time I have added every detail 

dear xxx

This notice has been forwarded to me today to the admin department from the registered office address of the company stated.

You mention a PCN but you do not refer to a NTK. No PCN was recorded on the vehicle itself. NO PCN has been received by post nor a NTD.

Your client is a member of the IPC and as such adheres to the code of practice.

I would refer you to the following

7.1 A breach of the Terms and Conditions may result in a Motorist being issued with a Parking Charge. The Motorist will be notified in writing either at the time of the event with a notice on the Windscreen, or soon after the event with the Registered Keeper being notified in the post.

I would reiterate – no notice to keeper was sent.  As you know a NTK must reasonably be sent within 14 days of of the alleged contravention and as the alleged date of the PCN was 25th November, the date to send the NTK has long expired - therefore do not pursue us for any debt collection relating to it.

The IPC code of practice states under Parking Charges

15.2 A reduction of a minimum of 40% must be offered where payment is made within 14 days

…or 15.2.2 of the issue of the Notice to Keeper and/or Notice to Hirer where the first notice is sent through the post.

The IPC code of practice determines what is a reasonable timescale. The NTK must therefore be delivered within that timescale that allows a driver the right to a discounted rate or to appeal (ie within 14 days)

and not  after the point  where they have lost that right to appeal and now incur increased charges. Your letter implies  it deems the PCN to now be outside any time limit. Ie you have determined it is now  overdue as below. You have added £60 of costs. 

15.3 Where a Parking Charge becomes overdue a reasonable sum may be added. This sum must not exceed £70 unless Court Proceedings have been initiated.

You refer to the terms and conditions being on the PCN (which the parking company failed to post or attach).  I quote your letter

 ‘which were detailed in the PCN and/or our client's terms and conditions. The terms and conditions were clearly displayed on our client's signage at the contravention location’

Remember there was no PCN and as your debt collection letter is the first notification of any PCN we were unable to refer to the terms and conditions you state were on it - agree but not given the opportunity to pay a reduced amount or disagree and appeal.

I also refer back to the IPC code of practice on signage

Signage Schedule 1

Text Size The size of the text on the sign must be appropriate for the location of the sign and should be clearly readable by a Motorist having regard to the likely position of the Motorist in relation to the sign.

The sign should be placed so that it is readable by drivers without their needing to look away from the road ahead. Any text on the sign not intended to be read from a moving vehicle can be of a smaller size.

I looked up the stated address of the street where the PCN was alleged to have happened.

I attach images from Google Maps showing what a driver would see whether turning in from the left or right lane of traffic. 

 (have taken screenshots) - 

It appears there is a small sign to the left of the corner at the road (illegible) that could relate to a notice of a restricted street though it is very small and not illuminated.

It is obvious the driver cannot see this before turning off the main road. The only way a driver could actually read this is turn in but then stop and lean over to the passenger seat side, thereby taking their eyes off the road ahead and pedestrians crossing it. In fact far from being adequate signage it is placed in a dangerous position. If indeed that is the sign? If not, there’s nothing else visible to show a driver before he/she turns off the main road.

Signs Displaying Terms and Conditions

The Operator must adequately display any signs intended to form the basis of contract between the Creditor and the Motorist. Such signs must (in addition to the requirements above): a. be in sufficient number so that they are clearly visible to Motorists on the Controlled Land; b. inform the Motorist of all the Terms and Conditions applicable to the use of Vehicles on the Controlled Land; c. identify yourself as ‘the Creditor’; d. identify the amount of any charge and explain when it becomes payable; e. advise Motorists that if a charge remains unpaid for a period of 28 days after issue then an application will be made for the Keeper’s details from DVLA, or, that they may be requested immediately such that a notice may be served on the keeper by post;

You have sent this debt collection letter to an address which is nothing to do with anything that would be held by the DVLA. However as no prompt notification was ever sent to the keeper that it has anyway been improperly administered and that as reasonable time has now passed for us to pay or appeal which you indicate, that you need to cancel this debt.

Failure to do so will result in us making a complaint and highlighting the circumstances to the IPC as we believe the pursuit of the PCN is in breach of the Code of Practice and that signage used is not only inadequate but in a dangerous location.

Please confirm by reply your response within 5 working days of receipt of this email. 

Yours faithfully

xxx

 

lola-909

do you think there's anything dubious - or does this look safe to send please?

Coupon-mad

I think that's fine but would give them 14 days (not working days).

lola-909

Thanks for your time looking over this - I will send on the letter. 

lola-909

i was about to log in and find the email address but they only offer an online submission - interestingly they are breaking the rules with their cookie info - they do not give users the option to reject cookies nor specify what they are used for. I have found the email address mentioned on mse last year so will use that but this is something to note about the company. the ICO covers the laws on this Right to be informed | ICO

What do we need to do to comply?

The rules on cookies are in regulation 6. The basic rule is that you must:

• tell people the cookies are there;
• explain what the cookies are doing and why; and
• get the person’s consent to store a cookie on their device.

 

lola-909

Should anyone want to email BWlegal directly in future the email address bypassing their portal is customerinfo@bwlegal.co.uk  as confirmed by phone with them 

Coupon-mad

Useful BW Legal email to know - thanks!

lola-909

Had a reply to my letter - they have provided now details of the PCN and NTK. These were not received and given that the parking company does not actually have to present evidence of posting it is not certain they were sent. The address was to  Keeper address in the letters they copied but no keeper identified ie. 'Company Secretary xxx ltd'

However they have not actually shown the vehicle parked up only where it is on the road and being driven  - and the sign at the entry was not clear to flag the driver was entering a private road. So vehicle had to continue to turn in and then leave. Do we have to reasonably still accept it was allocated correctly? Or is there anything that might still present as an appeal? total time 11 minutes. 

Coupon-mad

Nothing about this has changed our advice.  You don't pay just because BW Legal sent you that.

Do we have to reasonably still accept it was allocated correctly? Or is there anything that might still present as an appeal?

There's no appeal but if course you don't accept it.

You won't be paying.

I assume the Limited Company is who they are writing to, or has an individual been nominated as the keeper? 

There's wording missing from that NTK that means it's not POFA compliant even though it says it is.

Just do nothing now and let BW sue.  That's the ultimate dispute resolution and we have a Template Defence.  Very easy.