UKCPS / Moorside Legal Letter Before Claim LBC

stingray751

Hi all,

2 years ago I received a PCN for stopping for about 10-15 minutes in an empty dental surgery car park late evening after hours. My friend was picking up a Nandos’s takeaway order. The car was a rental and we didn’t leave the car. 

The UKCPS letters, debt collection and now solicitor letters incorrectly stated the reason for issue was “staff and customers of Nando’s are not permitted to park in this car park”. The signs in the car park state that “vehicles belonging to Nandos staff and customers are not permitted to park in this car park”. 

I received the letter before claim on the morning I left for my holiday abroad, so now my only choice of reply is via email. My complaint is their stated reason for issue is incorrect and is not what is displayed on the signs. Even if it was for the reason stated on the signs, the car was a rental so the vehicle didn’t belong to “Nandos staff and customers”.

Should I include this reason in the template response in the newbie thread, or wait until the next stage? I understand I must reply now to the LBC.

The initial fine was £60, then £100 and now £170. 

Thanks for any advice you can give me. 

Gr1pr

Email the standard LoC response template in the newbies sticky thread in announcements,  2nd post 

No additions 

stingray751

Here is the letter before claim 

Gr1pr

See my earlier reply,  nothings changed 

Then prepare for the inevitable N1SDT court claim pack from the CNBC in Northampton using MCOL to arrive in the post in due course 

stingray751

Thanks Gr1pr. I look forward to seeing that on my doormat when I return from holiday!

1505grandad

"The initial fine was £60, then £100 and now £170."

A heads-up  -  you will never find that word in any of their correspondence in this matter  -  it is only a speculative invoice  -  so never use that word in this respect.

Coupon-mad

For future reference: when you stop at night to pick up a takeaway order you can legitimately stop on street. Even on yellow lines (as long as there are no kerb blips too).

No car park is needed.

stingray751

Hi all, as expected I have received the N1SDT in the post, and have just applied for the 2 week extension via MCOL. 

The POC are the same as the other Moorside Legal posts: "3. The vehicle was parked in breach of the Terms on C's signs (the contract), thus incurring the charge." etc

For my defence, I'm following advice in post Template defence to adapt for all parking cases with added 'admin/DRA' costs - edited in 2025 — MoneySavingExpert Forum.  As this is Moorside Legal, my para 3 wording is following "CEL v Chan and CPMS v Akande", as per https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81571370/#Comment_81571370.

As I mentioned above above, the vehicle did not belong to a Nando's customer as 1) it was hired and 2) the hiree/driver wasn't the customer.  Do I add this information to para 3 or wait until the evidence stage?

Many thanks for your help!

Coupon-mad

No don't add anything about that.

But you could add that, since this is recognised to be a hired/leased car at the time, POFA Schedule 4 sets out clear mandatory steps for 'hirer liability' (paragraphs 13/14 of Sch 4) and not only has the Claimant never complied, but the POC also fails to plead 'hirer liability' under that Act. Absent the Claimant invoking & complying with this strict rule of law, there is no cause of action against the Defendant hirer/lessee.