LETTER OF CLAIM - Advice please!

Pyrrhical · 9 July 2018 at 11:38AM

Hi all,

I have received a letter through the post from bwlegal, dated 2 July 2018. I have trawled through the various threads and whatnot, reading useful replies from the likes of lotsofchildren123 and coupon-mad which have gained me reasonable insight but unfortunately I could not find anything regarding a letter of claim, only letter before claim.
Here are a few extracts which seem worrying:
"Our Client: Premier Parking Solutions Limited Date of Contravention: xx October 2015
Account Number: xxxxxxx Balance Due: £190
Contravention Description: No Valid Ticket or Permit Displayed
Contravention Location: Healy Place Plymouth

We have been instructed by Premier Parking Solutions Limited to commence legal action in the form of issuing a claim against you in the County Court in respect of the above debt. If payment or a response is not received before 6 August 2018, we are instructed to issue a claim against you in the County Court without further notice. If you dispute this debt, please tell us why so that we can help resolve this matter."

They have included an information sheet, a reply form and income and expenditure form amongst a small breakdown of cost. overleaf details the particulars of debt and pre action protocol for debt claims para. 7.
"Particulars of Debt
On xx October 2015, you were granted a limited contractual licence to enter the land known as ("site"), which is manager and operated by Our Client. In return, you were to abide by certain terms and conditions ("Terms and Conditions") which were prominently displayed on the signage erected in situ by Our Client. On xx October 2015 you breached the terms and conditions by No Valid Ticket or Permit Displayed ("Breach"). The breach resulted in our client issuing a Parking Charge Notice ("PCN") on xx/10/2015 which, despite our clients attempts to engage with you and agree a suitable payment arrangement, remains unpaid."

Do I have any ground for defence here? They are telling me I have 30 days to fill in the reply form and send it, if not it could result in court.

I am in England, have had all the other letters in the past from PPS and DRP all of which were ignored. I hadnt heard from them for about 18 months and now i get this, at a different address. please help.
kind regards

Umkomaas · 9 July 2018 at 11:44AM

Treat it as a LBC. Read the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, post #2 which will take you through dealing with the LBC (and subsequent stages). Do not fill in the form - you are not admitting any debt. Your earnings are none of their business.

If you haven't already guessed, you are now on a roboclaims conveyor belt. Everything at this stage (probably until you send in a well constructed defence - some way on in the future, not now) is regurgitated template with no human interaction whatsoever. However, you need to deal with it as you would if you were dealing with an individual at the other end.

Premier Parking Solutions seem to have cooled their ardour in pursuing through the courts - perhaps they've had a hard time of it. Maybe BWL can't effectively deliver for them.

http://www.parkingappeals.info/companydata/Premier_Parking_Solutions.html

beamerguy · 9 July 2018 at 11:45AM

You do not owe £190 as they have added no doubt, debt
collector charges of DRP.

DRP offer the PPC's a "no win, no fee" and as you ignored
DRP (RIGHT THING TO DO) they failed so NO FEE

Tell us your story about this as you do need to reply
to BWL within the 30 days

No big rush, get the advice from members here first
before you reply

DO READ ABOUT BWLEGAL
BWLegal - the list of failures growing

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5672664&highlight=bwlegal+the+list

Pyrrhical · 9 July 2018 at 1:39PM

Hi, thanks for your reply.
I have read through newbies faq post 2 however after reading several different defences, they often use one of three things as a means of defence:
1. Breach of protocol, i.e didn't send NTK in time or was never received etc
2. Unclear signage
3. insufficient evidence provided/ignored when contacted
From what I can gather from my own case, the signage was perfectly adequate (to be honest) not sure you could dispute that, they left a sticky note on my windscreen and followed it up with a hundred letters, they have showed me photos of the car parked in the street, the registration plate included which serves as evidence. all of the things which can be used as defence they seem to have covered

System · 9 July 2018 at 1:46PM

This is the time of year that is highly anticipated by the parking fraternity. They love to issue Letters of Claims / Claims about this time as they get double the amount of hassle in.

If you fail to engage due to being on holiday or don't have time due to going on holiday, you come back to a claim or a default CCJ.

If you manage to defend a claim, you are looking at late November/December/Xmas for a hearing date - a time when most people just fold.

So keep a very close eye on your mail over the next few weeks.

Pyrrhical · 9 July 2018 at 2:18PM

Here is some background of the 'offence':
I needed to attend a training course for work on friday 30th october 2015, the location of the course was different to my usual place of work. I think the time that the course started was 10am (hard to say, it was three years ago!) There is no parking available for employees and thus i needed to find a spot on a nearby street. Naturally all of the non permit parking was full and time was getting on so i had to park in a permit only street. However, the permits are not the typical ones issued by Plymouth City Council, it had permier parking solutions(PPS) signs littered everywhere, which i found odd in itself - why is this street in particular 'managed' by PPS? After the course had finished i returned to my car to find a nice yellow packet with a Parking Charge Notice within. I struggle to remember the demanded fee, somewhere in the region of £40-60 perhaps. Because i hadn't seen these PPS permits anywhere i was sceptical and researched online, only to find hundreds of cases on forums with the general message "IGNORE they are scammers who have no right to fine you".

So thats just what i did, each letter they sent i ignored, the price demanded i believe doubled to 130 quid which obviously is obscene, so again i left it and the time frame in between letters got longer. They referred my case onto Debt Recovery Plus (DRP) who sent increasingly colourful letters with their warnings and threats etc. Again i ignored them.

I hadn't heard a thing from them for so long i thought "ha, those pestering ****s have finally given up" and i rather foolishly threw away the paperwork they had sent as i had kept it all. I have now moved out, to another address where i have been for over a year and i get this letter of claim from BWlegal. so they must have got my new address from the DVLA.

Now, at the time of this so called 'breach of terms and conditions' i was 17 years old and had only passed my driving test a month or two beforehand. Can they take me to court for anything at all if i were 17 at the 'date of contravention'?
Because i was on what i believe is a public road ( i think? it is a street off a street) how can they claim the authority of parking management.. who has granted them this right?
The fee that was incurred.. how can that possibly be calculated? There were no loss of earnings, i simply parked in front of somebody's house, no different than any other street nearby.
I feel it is appropriate to mention that they do no know who the driver was, only the registered keeper. From the points mentioned above, i really am not sure whether i have a leg to stand on (legally), and whether they are even allowed to do this?
please feel free to request any further details which are of importance that i might have missed out.
cheers

Umkomaas · 9 July 2018 at 3:12PM

From what I can gather from my own case, the signage was perfectly adequate (to be honest) not sure you could dispute that

So you're an expert on private parking signage?

How do the signs compare with the requirements (colour, content, positioning, volume, font size and others) of their Trade Association's Code of Practice?

How do they compare with the signage that formed such an important element of the ParkingEye v Barry Beavis at The Supreme Court and which the seven Lord Justices' Judgment (and subsequent Tweet) made specific comment on?

Did the signage offer a 'licence to park', or was it 'prohibiting' in nature?

Do you have detailed of the signage in place at the time?

why is this street in particular 'managed' by PPS?

Legitimate question. Have you asked Plymouth City Council the question as to whether this is a private or adopted road - then you'll know for sure. Could be important.

only to find hundreds of cases on forums with the general message "IGNORE they are scammers who have no right to fine you".

Nah - private parking forums stopped issuing that advice in threads after the end of 2012.

They referred my case onto Debt Recovery Plus (DRP) who sent increasingly colourful letters with their warnings and threats etc. Again i ignored them.

That was the correct course of action with a debt collector.

so they must have got my new address from the DVLA.

Nope - they are not entitled to access your data from the DVLA more than once per parking event. They will have used a tracing agency.

Now, at the time of this so called 'breach of terms and conditions' i was 17 years old and had only passed my driving test a month or two beforehand.

Old enough to drive a lethal piece of machinery, possibly capable of 100mph+, yet not old enough to read a sign and determine how it applied to you? Won't fly!

Can they take me to court for anything at all if i were 17 at the 'date of contravention'?

Yes, and they have 6 years to do so.

Because i was on what i believe is a public road ( i think? it is a street off a street) how can they claim the authority of parking management.. who has granted them this right?

As per previous advice - Plymouth City Council can confirm the status of the road.

I feel it is appropriate to mention that they do no know who the driver was, only the registered keeper

A definite positive in your favour. You need to get yourself genned up on the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 as you will likely have to guide the Judge through it if it goes to court.

The fee that was incurred.. how can that possibly be calculated?

They make it up, then double it, add the age of their dog, apply VAT and throw in the cost of a few pints of Stella!

There were no loss of earnings,

The ParkingEye v Barry Beavis case made this argument all but defunct.

KeithP · 9 July 2018 at 5:43PM

Pyrrhical wrote: »

I feel it is appropriate to mention that they do no know who the driver was, only the registered keeper.

I feel it is appropriate to mention that, having read your post, they will know who the driver was.

There is no place for the word 'I' when describing events on the day.

You need to edit your most recent post.

Perhaps your second sentence should look something like:

The driver needed to attend a training course for work on Friday 30th October 2015, the location of the course was different to his/her usual place of work.

Please review and adjust the rest of your post similarly.

The parking companies trawl forums like this just waiting for people to trip themselves up, and can use your posts against you.

System · 9 July 2018 at 5:49PM

The parking companies trawl forums like this just waiting for people to trip themselves up, and can use your posts against you.

This is appropriate advice for people that wear tinfoil hats; think Elvis is still alive; and know, just know that "they" are listening to your phone.

The comments about PPC and who owns the road is worth checking.

The_Deep · 9 July 2018 at 6:33PM

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, and another company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each year). They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

Hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned.

The problem has become so rampant that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Watch the video of the Second Reading in the HofC recently.

http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind they will be out of business by Christmas.

Pyrrhical · 10 July 2018 at 11:01AM

Under Section 36 of the Highways Act 1980, the Council are obliged to keep a list of all streets in the city which are highways maintable at public expense (HMPE).
I have just found out that the street in question is listed as a road maintained by plymouth city council, according to their highways register.
Took a visit to the location.. the sign that is attached to a fence opposite states:
WARNING THIS LAND IS PRIVATE PROPERTY, PERMIT HOLDERS ONLY
Underneath the warning message reads: "Where applicable vehicles must park within an allocated bay, clearly display a valid permit on the dashboard or front windscreen and at no time cause an obstruction.
Any vehicle found parked here contravening the above or any other conditions advertised across this site are contractually agreeing to pay a parking charge to the sum of £100 within 28 days.
Conditions apply 24 hours a day 7 days a week.
PARKING CHARGE NOTICE £100 (reduced to £60 if paid within 14 days)

I have a picture of the sign if necessary. There are no allocated bays and i wasn't obstructing anything (although it does say where applicable). Does the fact that they are stating this public property as private render any litigation nul and void?

LETTER OF CLAIM - Advice please!

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free