Scotland - Private parking - Tesco - Debt Recovery Plus

Miniree

I’ve read a few threads and they’ve all said to ignore private parking charges in Scotland. 

I’ve now received 4 debt recovery plus letters all from different days varying from 8mths, 9mths, 12mths, 15mths ago. And also another final notice from 4mths ago. So now 5 in total. (One not went to debt collection yet)
all due to an overstay in the free 2hr car park. 

I have binned all the final notices that I ever received as I was always of the thought they can’t do anything. However now having letters from Debt Recovery Plus it’s made me somewhat more worried. Is the consensus still to ignore? I also couldn’t find the newbie thread - obviously having a blonde moment. 

Thank you in advance. 

Umkomaas

Even in England and Wales, where motorists are subject to keeper liability, the likes of DRP are utterly impotent. There is no prospect whatsoever that they have an ounce of greater potency in Scotland, and you can safely ignore them. 

You do know what you will receive after a deadline to respond to a 'Final Notice' has expired?  Another 'Final Notice'! 😄

KeithP

Miniree said:

I’ve now received 4 debt recovery plus letters all from different days.... 

Are you saying that these were four different alleged parking events?

The general guidance is to ignore these things in Scotland, but if you collect a lot - just because you can ignore them - then there comes a point where it might be worthwhile for the parking company to spend a few hundred pounds in the hope of recovering a much larger sum.

Be careful.

Which parking company?

Miniree

Yeah this is what I was most worried about. I have an issue with post finding my address. So not sure if they’ve even been sent in the first place. 

But I received the 2 parking charges for 8mths and 9mths together in an envelope 4 days ago from DRP with another final parking charge in another envelope- not sent to DPR - from horizon parking. 

And then another 2 today in the same envelope for 2 charges 12 and 15mths ago. 

All from the same car park. So needless to say I’m going to be more careful. But just a bit stressed with the amount of letters received. As I think I’d have been ok ignoring if it was just the one notice. 

LDast

Whilst there is always a slightly higher risk that a PPC would actually pursue a claim in the Scottish courts for more than a single PCN, it is still unlikely to be worth the expense of doing so. Whilst the cannot claim any costs for claims below £300, even for claims up to £1,500, they can only claim up to 10% of the claim amount in costs.

Whilst the scammers would try and add "damages" or "contractual costs" to each PCN, they are not allowed to actually do so. It would have to be argued why in a defence but most judges do not allow these fake added costs in a small claims track. Aside from the maximum of £100 per PCN, they would only be able to claim up to £40 in costs. It would cost them £112 to make a claim for over £300.

Miniree

LDast said:

Whilst there is always a slightly higher risk that a PPC would actually pursue a claim in the Scottish courts for more than a single PCN, it is still unlikely to be worth the expense of doing so. Whilst the cannot claim any costs for claims below £300, even for claims up to £1,500, they can only claim up to 10% of the claim amount in costs.

Whilst the scammers would try and add "damages" or "contractual costs" to each PCN, they are not allowed to actually do so. It would have to be argued why in a defence but most judges do not allow these fake added costs in a small claims track. Aside from the maximum of £100 per PCN, they would only be able to claim up to £40 in costs. It would cost them £112 to make a claim for over £300.

Thanks. Would you advise still to ignore all letters? 

Umkomaas

Miniree said:

LDast said:

Whilst there is always a slightly higher risk that a PPC would actually pursue a claim in the Scottish courts for more than a single PCN, it is still unlikely to be worth the expense of doing so. Whilst the cannot claim any costs for claims below £300, even for claims up to £1,500, they can only claim up to 10% of the claim amount in costs.

Whilst the scammers would try and add "damages" or "contractual costs" to each PCN, they are not allowed to actually do so. It would have to be argued why in a defence but most judges do not allow these fake added costs in a small claims track. Aside from the maximum of £100 per PCN, they would only be able to claim up to £40 in costs. It would cost them £112 to make a claim for over £300.

Thanks. Would you advise still to ignore all letters? 

Did you read my post at 6:21pm earlier today?  Was it unclear?  Here it is again. 

There is no prospect whatsoever that they have an ounce of greater potency in Scotland, and you can safely ignore them. 

Can you please answer @KeithP's question. Here it is again. 

Which parking company?

LDast

You ignore everything that isn't a Letter of Claim from the unregulated private parking company or their bottom-dwelling roboclaim solicitor or an actual N1SDT claim form issued through the CNBC.

KeithP

LDast said:

You ignore everything that isn't a Letter of Claim from the unregulated private parking company or their bottom-dwelling roboclaim solicitor or an actual N1SDT claim form issued through the CNBC.

In Scotland??  

LDast

KeithP said:
In Scotland??  

Oops. My bad.  

 I meant the Simple Procedure Claim form 3A. Either issued manually by post or through the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service (SCTS) digital platform called "Civil Online". 

Coupon-mad

Ignore it.

To reassure yourselves, why not just read other Scotland parking threads. You will need to be more careful in future because the law is changing (as you will read about in other Scotland parking threads when you do a forum search) but these ones can be ignored.