IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including QR codes, number plates and reference numbers.

[ En Te See] NTK ignored :( [Bee UU Legal] follow up advice please

RippedOffBritain
RippedOffBritain Posts: 35
First Anniversary
Forumite
edited 25 October 2018 at 11:25PM in Parking tickets, fines & parking
Ok, so I have asked a couple of prominent members for some advice via Pm, purely on some specifics that it is felt identify this case completely and whether these factors constitute any part of a defence in ‘Law’ as opposed to just ‘common sense’, or not. but was advised to create a post anyway, I believe this case is at the ‘Debt collector stage’, so would like confirmation of that please,

Hi, This post/thread has been started even though it probably shouldn’t at this stage ”apologies” (yes I have read through a lot of posts, and am well aware that this case isn’t unique,
But There are some Relatively unique or rather specific identifying defence information that it is believed can’t/(don’t think it advisable at this stage) to air on an open forum without making the case identity obvious to a prying eye and despite reading the acronym Glossary would just like some confirmation that the thoughts on the next step is correct rather than ‘do nothing’ at this point and find that there is a misunderstanding of which stage the case is at?

So Far…

The keeper received a postal PCN/NTK around a week after the alleged contravention, from NTC well over 6 months ago, addressed to the keeper and showing the date & time and an exiting picture of a car registered to keepers address leaving the car park in question.
Having looked on the forum back then and after printing out the template letter at the time, there was an intention to make the appeal as there are quite compelling extenuating circumstances, however for whatever reason, Procrastination/complications with ‘life’/forgetfulness until it was long past the submission date for appeal, so none was made.

Well over 6 months passed and the keeper received a” Letter” from BW Legal stating that they have been instructed by the aforementioned scammers in relation to the balance due for the PCN.
It continues:- The Balance due includes the £100 PCN charge plus Our Clients initial Legal costs of £60 which are detailed in the car park or signage terms and conditions. Followed by lots of generic Blurb that has been seen repeated on this site, including threatening sounding CCJ speak, 6 times in 6 lines.
This letter was accompanied by one from ‘apparently’ NTC despite being printed on the same paper on the same printer at the same time as the BW Legal headed letter effectively stating that they have passed keepers account to BW Legal their approved legal service provider.

[Detail removed for now until hopefully discussed in PM,]

The original PCN/NTK shows a picture of the car leaving the car park, the Parking Charge Details list the Date and Time of Contravention that corresponds with a time ***************************, but without an entry picture, the exact timings cannot be known, if it can be assumed that the exit time has been stated?
Has it?
Does the one picture and one date and time make it reasonable to assume, yes I know, I know ??) there is no mention of the entry time ??

The keeper has only been provided with an exit photo and a ‘time of offence’ time?? Should They have been provided with an entry time and exit time along with the photo of both? The photo provided has no actual time and date detail on it? But I assume this may have been cropped out?
Clearly the keeper should have appealed at initial NTK stage… but didn’t so is this the 2nd stage? Or is this still the debt collector stage.[are Bee UU Legal] considered debt collectors at this stage until writing the LBC notifying of Court proceedings?
So Just to confirm, The keeper should ignores this current letter even though it’s from an apparent solicitor?? If the sticky’ thread has been understood .
They need to:-
wait for the Letter of claim now they’ve missed any appeal potential,
Wait for LBC from BW Legal
Then complete MCOL and AOS, Then prepare a defence which will be filed on MCOL?
Or should they need to request info from BW Legal? with SAR first?
What stage should this be done ? After receiving an LBC? Assuming this letter isn’t (seems like the first letter from BW Legal so are they still debt collectors?
OR should the SAR be directed at NTC rather than BW Legal
There is another case Very similar on here, but with but with a failed initial appeal which hasn’t progressed at this time.

Again apologies for the extended post that is probably premature and missing detail However having failed to appeal the original NTK the Keeper is very keen to make sure any subsequent actions are carried out correctly.

ROB

As always any and all answers are gratefully received
I Will re-read #2 of the stickies’ and also search a template SAR, but if any particular ones are recommended it would be appreciated. Thanks
«13456

Comments

  • fisherjim
    fisherjim Posts: 5,981
    Photogenic First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Forumite
    Sorry, I lost the will to live reading all that cryptic rubbish, this is a simple parking forum not an episode of a BBC espionage series!


    Do you really think the regulars that volunteer on here have the time to decipher all that, which as far as I can tell is no different to any other scam pcn!
  • Fruitcake
    Fruitcake Posts: 58,155
    Name Dropper Photogenic First Anniversary First Post
    Forumite
    edited 25 October 2018 at 7:58AM
    Much of what you have written is irrelevant. The road closure, the shop being closed, what the driver was doing etcetera. I suggest you delete all of the non relevant stuff.

    The BB scheme does not apply on private land.

    The basics are, The Driver parked in a car park. The keeper got a NTK. You are correct that none of this is unique.

    There is no problem writing NTC and BW Legal on here. Just make sure reference is only ever made to The Driver and The Keeper. Please confirm the full name of the PPC just so we are sure. There are many companies with similar initials. There are some companies with the same initials.

    I accept PM's, but I reserve the right not to acknowledge them. If I can help, I will. If I can't, or don't know the answers, I will tell you.

    You can check how long I have been a member, my post count and thanks count. If you are unsure, wait to see if any of the regulars vouch for me.

    I think the BW letter is a LBC, but can't be 100% certain without seeing it.

    On the assumption that it is a LBC, you should respond robustly to it, and ask for more information including dates and times of alleged event, and photo' evidence of same with the metadata included.

    You should also get your own pics of the site including the entrance, and signage. I would suggest the car park itself isn't used for this unless an occupant of the car is using the facilities provided by the landowner/retailer.

    Do you still have the NTK? If so you can post a redacted copy here by uploading it to a web hosting site, then pasting the URL here, but change http to hxxp. Someone here will change it back to a live link.

    If you don't have the NTK then you should ask BW for a copy.
    I married my cousin. I had to...
    I don't have a sister. :D
    All my screwdrivers are cordless.
    "You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks
  • Umkomaas
    Umkomaas Posts: 41,256
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Photogenic
    Forumite
    wait to see if any of the regulars vouch for me.
    Fruitcake is a stalwart of this forum. 100% trusted.
    Please note, we are not a legal advice forum. I personally don't get involved in critiquing court case Defences/Witness Statements, so unable to help on that front. Please don't ask. .

    I provide only my personal opinion, it is not a legal opinion, it is simply a personal one. I am not a lawyer.

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.

    Private Parking Firms - Killing the High Street
  • Feared such a response by the time I'd finished but rewritten it over and over after reading various responses on here saying either. "How do you expect help without detail" or "you have written it in a manner that admits liability of who. The driver is.. " along with " they do read these forums"...

    When you don't understand the law and feel the simple facts give away your case and asking for clarification on whether something has any basis in law, again the specifics of which give the case away, leaving it ending up how you have perceived it.
    :(

    On the assumption that the PPC's monitor the forum I didn't see the point in making it easy for them that a simple search took them straight to their cases so apologies for making yet another mistake :o

    ROB
  • fisherjim
    fisherjim Posts: 5,981
    Photogenic First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Forumite
    Feared such a response by the time I'd finished but rewritten it over and over after reading various responses on here saying either. "How do you expect help without detail" or "you have written it in a manner that admits liability of who. The driver is.. " along with " they do read these forums"...

    When you don't understand the law and feel the simple facts give away your case and asking for clarification on whether something has any basis in law, again the specifics of which give the case away, leaving it ending up how you have perceived it.
    :(

    On the assumption that the PPC's monitor the forum I didn't see the point in making it easy for them that a simple search took them straight to their cases so apologies for making yet another mistake :o

    ROB




    Ha ha don't worry I just think you over egged it a bit, fruitcake is a bit of a sleuth though!:D
  • Thank you... You are obviously a BBC Drama Fan as you have effectively re-written the post correctly��

    So again thankyou..

    I totally understood fisherjim's post, but until someone confirmed what can and can't be stated was struggling...

    Pm to follow as again it is a case of wanting to know whether what I consider relevant, has any basis in law at all...
    And thank you for the recommendation Umkomaas! Not needed in this instance but so welcome all the same!

    ROB
  • Indeed ;)
    Though he probably just thought
    "I'm sure I've Seen this one!!!"
    ��
  • Fruitcake
    Fruitcake Posts: 58,155
    Name Dropper Photogenic First Anniversary First Post
    Forumite
    fisherjim wrote: »
    Ha ha don't worry I just think you over egged it a bit, fruitcake is a bit of a sleuth though!:D


    That would be Fruitcake, not fruitcake. There is or was another poster of the latter username. We wouldn't want sensitive information going to the wrong person. ;)
    I married my cousin. I had to...
    I don't have a sister. :D
    All my screwdrivers are cordless.
    "You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks
  • fisherjim
    fisherjim Posts: 5,981
    Photogenic First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Forumite
    Fruitcake wrote: »
    That would be Fruitcake, not fruitcake. There is or was another poster of the latter username. We wouldn't want sensitive information going to the wrong person. ;)


    :rotfl: Just confirms my sleuth assumption again!
  • RippedOffBritain
    RippedOffBritain Posts: 35
    First Anniversary
    Forumite
    edited 26 October 2018 at 11:10AM
    Ok so information update,

    NTC Norwich Traffic control Limited NTK redacted pdf :-

    hxxps://uploadfiles.io/wetpy

    Picture of a sign taken the day after keeper received NTK here:-

    hxxps://ufile.io/ndatv

    BW Legal letter to follow :-

    hxxps://ufile.io/lxky0

    Pretty certain this is the standard fodder from BW and is still an ignore untill LBC ? but posted for clarification

    PLEASE CAN AN EXPERIENCED FORUMITE CREAT THE LINKS FOR ME,

    some specific questions, as well as any obvious suggestions for issues with the paperwork gratefully received.

    1. the picture is not time and date stamped (just shows the rear of a vehicle (registered at the keepers adress) 'apparently' leaving the carpark , then typed text in the section beside the photo suggest a contravention time and date.Should the actual picture be time and date stamped?

    2.or should it be assumed that the picture provided has been cropped from a larger one which will be time stamped?
    does the Claimant have to show the car 'parked' to prove a contravention? and or coherent entry and exit pictures at least to show time spent in the carpark? [with date and timestamps again?]
    3. the reason I have specifically asked these questions is that the Vehicle has on a selection of different occasions been driven onto the carpark in question purely as a result of excessive traffic build-up and literally head to head traffic unable to pass so the car park has been used to 'get out of the way' of a flow of traffic in the opposite direction, before returning to the highway and continue the journey... in isolation this exit picture 'could' easily be as a result of such a manoeuvre ?
    I guess I have to write an SAR once LBC is received to request all photographic evidence they have?


    Thanks for looking..

    ROB
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 342.5K Banking & Borrowing
  • 249.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.4K Spending & Discounts
  • 234.6K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 607.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 172.8K Life & Family
  • 247.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.8K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards