Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • pcnhater
    • By pcnhater 17th Dec 18, 11:16 AM
    • 13Posts
    • 2Thanks
    pcnhater
    Brittania PCN and BW Legal
    • #1
    • 17th Dec 18, 11:16 AM
    Brittania PCN and BW Legal 17th Dec 18 at 11:16 AM
    Hello Everyone,


    I am another victim of these parking scammers. I have received a letter from Brittania Parking and BW Legal that I have failed to pay for PCN so need to pay £85 + £60 legal fees and they have given me 16 days to respond. They did not give any forms to complete. This is about PCN they issued years ago. These 16 days have now elapsed.


    I am thinking of offering them £40 and close this case as don;t have much time to go through all the process. However, if they don;t accept it then i am willing to go all the way to the court.


    Can anyone please suggest me if offering them £40 in anyway will count against me if it goes to the court and also if anyone has any letter templates I can use?


    Many Thanks
Page 1
    • fisherjim
    • By fisherjim 17th Dec 18, 12:14 PM
    • 3,674 Posts
    • 5,734 Thanks
    fisherjim
    • #2
    • 17th Dec 18, 12:14 PM
    • #2
    • 17th Dec 18, 12:14 PM
    Don't waste your time £40 won't be of any interest to them except to confirm they have hooked a mug sorry!


    The £60 they have added on is nothing to do with legal fees, they have incurred no fees of this kind just another scam they have hidden in their arsenal of lies to frighten you.


    BW legal are acting as debt collectors, and can be ignored.


    How long ago is "years ago"?


    They have six years in which to hold this alleged debt on file and then it times out, don't ignore real court papers though.


    Have you read the newbies thread yet on page one which explains this whole sorry business?
    • pcnhater
    • By pcnhater 17th Dec 18, 3:21 PM
    • 13 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    pcnhater
    • #3
    • 17th Dec 18, 3:21 PM
    • #3
    • 17th Dec 18, 3:21 PM
    Thanks fisherjim.


    PCN was issued around 2.5years ago. I have read through the beginner section but there is a lot of information there and i am kind of lost what action to take next. I think i need to send SAR first. Right?


    Appreciate your help.
    Last edited by pcnhater; 17-12-2018 at 3:26 PM.
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 17th Dec 18, 3:27 PM
    • 15,252 Posts
    • 17,772 Thanks
    KeithP
    • #4
    • 17th Dec 18, 3:27 PM
    • #4
    • 17th Dec 18, 3:27 PM
    As FisherJim says, that's a debt collectors letter.

    Post #4 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread describes exactly how to deal with debt collectors letters.
    .
    • Redx
    • By Redx 17th Dec 18, 3:34 PM
    • 22,625 Posts
    • 28,752 Thanks
    Redx
    • #5
    • 17th Dec 18, 3:34 PM
    • #5
    • 17th Dec 18, 3:34 PM
    by all means send a SAR to get all they have on you, but bear in mind that 6 year deadline so 2.5 years is not even halfway
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
    • pcnhater
    • By pcnhater 20th Dec 18, 9:00 PM
    • 13 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    pcnhater
    • #6
    • 20th Dec 18, 9:00 PM
    • #6
    • 20th Dec 18, 9:00 PM
    I have received Letter of claim giving me 30 days to respond. It also have some forms to fill in whether i deny or agree to the claim along Income and expense form.


    I have sent SAR to Britannia Parking and have also informed bw legal about it.


    Do I need to do anything more at this stage?
    • pcnhater
    • By pcnhater 21st Jan 19, 7:56 AM
    • 13 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    pcnhater
    • #7
    • 21st Jan 19, 7:56 AM
    • #7
    • 21st Jan 19, 7:56 AM
    I have received a response back from Brittania which I have posted below. I have checked other posts with similar response but in all those posts, they also received information they requested in SAR. however, I have not received any information from them. The deadline of 1 month to process has now passed



    Can someone please guide me what response to send back to them.




    Dear Sir/Madam,
    We have received your Subject Access Request, under ICO guidelines we have one calendar month to respond.
    Please be aware we will send a copy of all personal data we hold only. If you have made a request for any additional information which does not qualify as personal data, please see below.
    YOU’RE REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
    • Landowner agreement - You are not entitled to business sensitive information, it will only be supplied at court, as evidence and not before.
    • Contract with the driver - The contract is on the signage in the car park. A copy of the signage will be provided as evidence at court.
    • Machine reports - You are not entitled to transactions which do not relate to you, you will be provided with your transaction only. We are under no obligation to provide you with anything further.
    • Picture packs - A copy of the signage will be provided as evidence at court.
    Your SAR request is free, however please be aware we are able to charge for additional copies and any requests for information we consider to be manifestly unfounded or excessive. ICO guidelines advise we are able to charge a reasonable administration fee, which is £10.
    Please send a cheque payable to Britannia Parking to the following address: Data Protection Officer, County Gates House, 7th Floor, 300 Poole Road, Poole, BH12 1AZ.
    Include a list of the additional information you require and the PCN number/s. Once the cheque has cleared we will action your request. We will only send additional information which is not business sensitive.
    Please refer to the ICO website for further information:
    If you do not wish to pay £10, we are under no obligation to provide you with the information, your only options is to wait until this matter progresses to court, when it will be adduced as evidence.
    Once you are in receipt of your SAR, all additional correspondence regarding the request for additional information will not be responded to, unless payment of £10 is received.
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 21st Jan 19, 8:02 AM
    • 13,483 Posts
    • 13,839 Thanks
    The Deep
    • #8
    • 21st Jan 19, 8:02 AM
    • #8
    • 21st Jan 19, 8:02 AM
    These 16 days have now elapsed.

    What you have there is a begging letter from a debt collector, it is not a letter before claim from a solicitor as a genuine LBC must contain forms, and allow 30 days to pay.

    It is the will of Parliament that these scammers, (very often former clampers), be put out of business.

    Hopefully that will take place in the near future. The Bill has passed through the HOC without hitch, and goes to the Lords soon. In the meantime involve your MP, the poor dears are buckling under the weight of complaints about these scammers.

    This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of alleged contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors. Is has been suggested by an MP that some of these companies may have connections to organised crime.

    Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, (especially Smart}, and others have already been named and shamed in the House of Commons as have Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each week), hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned. They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

    The problem has become so widespread that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers.

    Sir Greg Knight's Private Members Bill to curb the excesses, and perhaps close down, some of these companies passed its Third Reading in late November, and, with a fair wind, will become Law next year.

    All three readings are available to watch on the internet, (some 6-7 hours), and published in Hansard. MPs have an extremely low opinion of the industry. Many are complaining that they are becoming overwhelmed by complaints from members of the public. Add to their burden, complain in the most robust terms about the scammers.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • pcnhater
    • By pcnhater 21st Jan 19, 8:39 AM
    • 13 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    pcnhater
    • #9
    • 21st Jan 19, 8:39 AM
    • #9
    • 21st Jan 19, 8:39 AM
    @the Deep - I received LBC from BW Legal with 30 days to pay and few forms to fill in. I think these 30 days are close to expiring. I am thinking of sending rebuttal. What will you suggest to do next?
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 21st Jan 19, 8:51 AM
    • 13,483 Posts
    • 13,839 Thanks
    The Deep
    Please read the stickies/FAQS. All is revealed therein.i
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 21st Jan 19, 11:06 AM
    • 73,481 Posts
    • 85,578 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    If you do not wish to pay £10, we are under no obligation to provide you with the information, your only options is to wait until this matter progresses to court, when it will be adduced as evidence.
    You need to report them to the ICO online, NOW.

    They are refusing even to give you the basic data like photos, and telling you they'll give it to you as evidence nearer a court hearing. They are not allowed to withhold this data, and where is the VRN machine list? It's unclear, but they then say:

    ''if you do not wish to pay £10, we are under no obligation to provide you with the information, your only options is to wait until this matter progresses to court''.

    The letter is also highly misleading as it seems on first reading, to ask for £10 for the SAR, so I bet people will be sending that, when in fact that's for further copies.
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT UNLESS IN SCOTLAND OR NI
    TWO Clicks needed Look up, top of the page:
    Main site>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
    • pcnhater
    • By pcnhater 1st Feb 19, 9:29 AM
    • 13 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    pcnhater
    Thanks every one for helping me so far. I have received a lovely Claim form from County Court. Summary of my case is below:


    - Britannia/BW are chasing me for a PCN from 2016
    - I sent SAR request and they asked me to verify my address which I did. They now say that 1 month will start from the time i confirmed my address details. 1 month from date will be expiring in few days
    - They have refused to provide even simple details such as pictures etc
    - BW Legal refused to put the case on hold until SAR is processed


    I am now going to go through the posts on how to acknowledge it and then prepare my defense. As Ia m going on holidays from 14th so I want to prepare my defense before I go.


    If there are any suggestions or particular posts I should be looking at then please let me know.




    The claimant's claim is for the sum of £85 being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant in respect of a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) issued on xx/xx/2016 at XXXXX


    The PCN relates to XXXX under registration XXXX. The terms of the PCN allowed the Defendant 28 days from the issue Date to pay the PCN, but the defendant failed to do so. Despite demand having being made, the Defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability.


    The claim also includes Statutory Interest pursuant to section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum a daily rate of 0.02 from xxx/xx/2016 to 29/01/2019 being an amount of £xx.xx


    The claimant also claims £60.00 contractual costs pursuant to PCN terms and conditions


    Amount Claimed: I am not providing exact amount so they can't work out the date PCN was issued. It includes £85+Interest+£60 bw legal cost

    Court Fees: £25
    Legal Representative cost: £50
    Total amount: £xxx
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 1st Feb 19, 11:13 AM
    • 15,252 Posts
    • 17,772 Thanks
    KeithP
    What is the Issue Date on your Claim Form?

    Did it come from the County Court Business Centre in Northampton. or from somewhere else?
    .
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 1st Feb 19, 11:24 AM
    • 11,437 Posts
    • 15,537 Thanks
    beamerguy
    They have refused to provide even simple details such as pictures etc
    - BW Legal refused to put the case on hold until SAR is processed


    So BWLegal and Britannia are restricting you in making a valid defence and on that basis you ask the court to strike out the claim.

    As coupon-mad has said, a complaint to the ICO about Britannia
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • pcnhater
    • By pcnhater 1st Feb 19, 11:53 AM
    • 13 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    pcnhater
    @Keith P - Issue Date is 30 Jan 2019 and it comes from County Court Business Centre in Northampton
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 1st Feb 19, 12:30 PM
    • 15,252 Posts
    • 17,772 Thanks
    KeithP
    Issue Date is 30 Jan 2019 and it comes from County Court Business Centre in Northampton.
    Originally posted by pcnhater
    With a Claim Issue Date of 30th January, you have until Monday 18th February to do the Acknowledgement of Service, but there is nothing to be gained by delaying it. To do the AoS, follow the guidance offered in a Dropbox link from post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread.

    Having done the AoS, you have until 4pm on Monday 4th March 2019 to file your Defence.

    That's over a month away - but it's a short month. Loads of time to produce a perfect Defence, but don't leave it to the very last minute.


    When you are happy with the content, your Defence should be filed via email as suggested here:
    1. Print your Defence.
    2. Sign it and date it.
    3. Scan the signed document back in and save it as a pdf.
    4. Send that pdf as an email attachment to CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk
    5. Just put the claim number and the word Defence in the email title, and in the body of the email something like 'Please find my Defence attached'.
    6. Log into MCOL after a few days to see if the Claim is marked "defended". If not chase the CCBC until it is.
    7. Do not be surprised to receive a copy of the Claimant's Directions Questionnaire, they are just trying to put you under pressure.
    8. Wait for your DQ from the CCBC, or download one from the internet, and then re-read post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread to find out exactly what to do with it.
    .
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 1st Feb 19, 7:15 PM
    • 73,481 Posts
    • 85,578 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    any suggestions or particular posts I should be looking at then please let me know.
    You will find them yourself when you search the forum (ADVANCED SEARCH, AND CHANGE TO 'SHOW RESULTS AS POSTS') for keywords:

    Britannia defence BW Legal
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT UNLESS IN SCOTLAND OR NI
    TWO Clicks needed Look up, top of the page:
    Main site>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
    • pcnhater
    • By pcnhater 2nd Feb 19, 11:56 AM
    • 13 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    pcnhater
    Thanks. Acknowledgement of Service is done.


    I have gone through some of the posts discussing defense. I can take some of the points but one thing I am not too sure about is how I dispute Contravention. The only contravention description I have is "Parked in a non-parking restricted area or access way". I have no pictures of my car parked, signage etc. What should I put in my defense related to this?
    • pcnhater
    • By pcnhater 26th Feb 19, 10:12 PM
    • 13 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    pcnhater
    My defense is below and I will appreciate any comments. As mentioned in my earlier messages, I am not sure what should be the basis of my defense when claimant has not provided details under Data Protection and car park no longer exist so i can;t take pictures of my own either. Also, the car was not parked in the designated bay but instead partially on the pavement and road. Parking ticket was bought and displayed on windscreen. However, it was not blocking any car or pedestrian. It was a small car park and what i can remember is there was only one sign with tiny font.





    IN THE COUNTY COURT
    CLAIM No: xxxxxxxxxx
    BETWEEN:
    Britannia Parking Ltd (Claimant)
    -and-
    xxxxxxxxxxxx (Defendant)
    ________________________________________
    DEFENCE
    ________________________________________
    1. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.

    2. The Particulars of Claim state only that the PCN relates to ‘car make’ under registration XXXXXX and the claimant has failed to identify the driver. The Claimant is put to strict proof in identifying the driver.

    3. The facts are that the vehicle, registration XXXX, of which the Defendant is the registered keeper, was parked on the material date at [location]. There is no presumption in law as to who parked a vehicle on private land nor does there exist any obligation for a keeper to name a driver. I choose to defend this claim as the registered keeper, as is my right.

    4. The Claimant has provided no evidence (in pre-action correspondence or otherwise) that the Defendant was the driver. The Defendant avers that the Claimant is therefore limited to pursuing the Defendant in these proceedings under the provisions set out by statute in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ("POFA")

    5. Before seeking to rely on the keeper liability provisions of Schedule 4 POFA the Claimant must demonstrate that:
    5.1. there was a ‘relevant obligation’ either by way of a breach of contract, trespass or other tort; and
    5.2. that it has followed the required deadlines and wording as described in the Act to transfer liability from the driver to the registered keeper.
    It is not admitted that the Claimant has complied with the relevant statutory requirements.

    6. To the extent that the Claimant may seek to allege that any such presumption exist, the Defendant expressly denies that there is any presumption in law (whether in statute or otherwise) that the keeper is the driver. Further, the Defendant denies that the vehicle keeper is obliged to name the driver to a private parking firm. Had this been the intention of parliament, they would have made such requirements part of POFA, which makes no such provision. In the alternative, an amendment could have been made to s.172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. The 1988 Act continues to oblige the identification of drivers only in strictly limited circumstances, where a criminal offence has been committed. Those provisions do not apply to this matter.

    7. Due to the sparseness of the particulars, it is unclear as to what legal basis the claim is brought, whether for breach of contract, contractual liability, or trespass. However, it is denied that the Defendant, or any driver of the vehicle, entered into any contractual agreement with the Claimant, whether express, implied, or by conduct.

    8. Further and in the alternative, it is denied that the claimant's signage sets out the terms in a sufficiently clear manner which would be capable of binding any reasonable person reading them.

    9. The terms on the Claimant's signage are also displayed in a font which is too small to be read from a passing vehicle and is in such a position that anyone attempting to read the tiny font would be unable to do so easily. It is, therefore, denied that the Claimant's signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract.

    10. Defendant requested photographic evidence of the car this claim is related to and close up of the signs on the day in question, taken at the time with supporting evidence that they were in force, legible, accessible and installed to cover the period in question. However, claimant refused to provide such details and their response stated that they will present in the court.


    12. The Claimant is put to strict proof that it has sufficient proprietary interest in the land, or that it has the necessary authorisation from the landowner to issue parking charge notices, and to pursue payment by means of litigation.

    13. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4, at Section 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper, in this case £100. The claim includes an additional £60, for which no calculation or explanation is given, and which appears to be an attempt at double recovery.

    14. There also appears to be an attempt to hide this additional £60 charge from the court as a ‘Contractual Cost’ that has been referred as varying additional charges throughout the Claimants and their Solicitors correspondences, most recently hidden as a £110 ‘Solicitor Costs’ fee on BW Legal letter dated xx/xx/xx, which is a sum in excess and specifically prohibited from being claimed in small claims court.

    15. It is not believed that the Claimant has incurred additional costs - be it legal or debt collector costs and they are put to strict proof that they have actually incurred and can lawfully add an extra sums and that those sums formed part of the permit/parking contract formed with the resident in the first instance.

    16. Section B.1.1 of the IPC Code of Practice outlines to operators:
    1.1 If you operate parking management activities on land which is not owned by you, you must supply us with written authority from the land owner sufficient to establish you as the “Creditor” within the meaning of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (where applicable) and in any event to establish you as a person who is able to recover parking charges. There is no prescribed form for such agreement and it need not necessarily be as part of a contract but it must include the express ability for an operator to recover parking charges on the landowner's behalf or provide sufficient right to occupy the land in question so that charges can be recovered by the operator directly. This applies whether or not you intend to use the keeper liability provisions.
    a. The Claimant is put to strict proof they have such authority to operate on site and to take action in their own name. The same is a requirement of any contract based on conduct.
    b. The Claimant is not the landowner and is merely an agent acting on behalf of the landowner and has failed to demonstrate their legal standing to form a contract.
    c. The Claimant is not the landowner and suffers no loss whatsoever as a result of a vehicle parking at the location in question
    d. The Claimant is put to proof that it has sufficient interest in the land or that there are specific terms in its contract to bring an action on its own behalf. As a third party agent, the Claimant may not pursue any charge

    17. If in the alternative it is the claimant's case that his claim is founded in trespass (which is in any event denied) then in a residential car park setting any damages in trespass can only be assessed based on a calculation of the proportion of income lost based on the time of the alleged occupation. Any sum sought could therefore only be minimal and de-minimis
    Only the landowner can pursue a case under the tort of trespass not this Claimant, and as the Supreme Court in the Beavis vs ParkingEye (2015) UKSC 67 case confirmed, such a matter would be limited to the landowner themselves.

    18. It is denied that the Defendant or lawful users of the vehicle were in breach of any parking conditions or were not permitted to park in circumstances where an express permission to park had been granted to the Defendant permitting the above mentioned vehicle to be parked by the current occupier and leaseholder of [address], whose tenancy agreement permits the parking of visitors vehicle within any visitor parking space. The Defendant avers that with Primacy of Contract, there was an absolute entitlement to park deriving from the terms of the lease, which cannot be fettered by any alleged parking terms. The lease terms provide the right to park a vehicle in the relevant allocated bay, without limitation to ownership of vehicle, the user of the vehicle or the requirement to display a parking permit. A copy of the lease will be provided to the Court.

    19. The Defendant avers that the operator’s signs cannot (i) override the existing rights enjoyed by residents and their visitors and (ii) that parking easements cannot retrospectively and unilaterally be restricted where provided for within the lease. The Defendant will rely upon the judgments on appeal of HHJ Harris QC in Jopson v Homeguard Services Ltd (2016) and of Sir Christopher Slade in K-Sultana Saeed v Plustrade Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 2011. The Court will be referred to further similar fact cases in the event that this matter proceeds to trial.

    20. In summary, it is the Defendant's position that the claim discloses no cause of action, is without merit, and has no real prospect of success. Accordingly, the Court is invited to strike out the claim of its own initiative, using its case management powers pursuant to CPR 3.4.

    I believe the facts contained in this Defence are true.

    Name
    Signature
    Date
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 27th Feb 19, 12:27 AM
    • 73,481 Posts
    • 85,578 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    That's very long and it wrongly cites the IPC CoP. Britannia are in the BPA.
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT UNLESS IN SCOTLAND OR NI
    TWO Clicks needed Look up, top of the page:
    Main site>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

1,517Posts Today

7,984Users online

Martin's Twitter