6 Years n and I've Got a PCN...?

paulweller · 17 October 2016 at 11:27AM

Hi,

on 19th Nov 2010 my missus got a PCN but the car was registered in my name so the fine came to me.

I came on here and found out that the fine was "un-enforcable" and duly went on to send the 3 template letters (found here on MSE) to the company, Vehicle Control Services LTD (VCS Ltd), who were chasing the fine.

After the third letter I've not heard back from VCS Ltd (or anyone).

Until this Saturday 15th Oct 2016, some 6 years later...I received a letter from "BW Legal" stating that they have been instructed by VCS to collect an outstanding balance. Threatening potential court action, costs, etc...

Since then I have got divorced and the vehicle is still owned by my ex!

So my question is, what course of action can/should I take?

Cheers.

Coupon-mad · 17 October 2016 at 11:35AM

Same as all the other six year cases from BW Legal, we have loads here (did you search this board for: 'BW Legal'? Do that!!) and even more on pepipoo, showing you how to respond to see this out past the 6 year end date for them to pursue:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=109169

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=109132&st=0&p=1219970&#entry1219970

They are trying it on, last gasp. After 6 years it is 'statute barred' for recovery.

DO NOT IGNORE NOR PANIC, KEEP THEM DANGLING WITH REPLIES!

paulweller · 17 October 2016 at 4:20PM

Thinking of sending this on the 24th Oct (they gave me 16 days from the 11th Oct)...

Too much not enough? Any advice greatly appreciated.

Dear Sir or Madam:

With regard to your letter dated 11th October 2016, I deny any debt to your client, Vehicle Control Services LTD. (VCS LTD)

As you will no doubt be aware, I have previously informed your client PCS LTD that I while I am the registered keeper of the vehicle, I was not the driver at the time of the alleged offence.

In order for me to assist you further, please provide suitable evidence to support your claim. For the avoidance of doubt, I require evidence of all the points below in order to consider your clients claim.

(a) Details of the land on which the vehicle was parked, the period of parking to which your claim relates, and evidence showing that the vehicle was in fact parked on that land during that period of parking.
(b) Details of any charges due from the driver, the circumstances in which the requirement to pay your client arose, the means by which the requirement was brought to the attention of the driver, and any other details to support your claim that a charge was payable, with evidence to support same.
(c) Evidence of your clients authority to levy charges at the location, and to initiate action in their own name.
(d) Any information you have to identify the driver, including CCTV or photographic evidence.

If your clients are not able to provide satisfactory evidence of all of the above points within 28 days of the service of this letter, I will consider the matter closed. A refusal to send through such evidence will be considered unreasonable behavior.

Umkomaas · 17 October 2016 at 4:24PM

As you will no doubt be aware, I have previously informed your client PCS LTD that I while I am the registered keeper of the vehicle, I was not the driver at the time of the alleged offence.

Do you mean VCS?

Letter looks ok. Important you play letter ping-pong to get this statute barred at the 6 years point.

The_Deep · 17 October 2016 at 4:29PM

This is tantamount to fraud, for which they, (BWL), are currently being investigated by the SRA. Send copies of all correspondence to Duncan Allen, SRA.

http://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/problems/report-solicitor.page

The more complaints they get the quicker they are likely to act.

paulweller · 17 October 2016 at 4:35PM

Yep VCS! Changed

)

And yes I've sent supporting letters etc :beer:

Fruitcake · 17 October 2016 at 6:55PM

You could also say that since the alleged event was before the POFA 2012, only the driver is liable, which they already know. Then ask them for the driver's details so you can pass this on to them.

paulweller · 18 October 2016 at 9:17AM

Fruitcake wrote: »

You could also say that since the alleged event was before the POFA 2012, only the driver is liable, which they already know. Then ask them for the driver's details so you can pass this on to them.

Saving this for the second letter... :j

paulweller · 8 November 2016 at 12:32PM

So BW Legal have just replyied with all the information I requested in the letter above...

And in their closing paragraph state:

As details of the driver not been forthcoming to suggest otherwise, our client, in the absence of the drivers details, reasonably presumes you were the driver and we refer you to the case of Elliott v Loake [1982].

In order to prevent further costs from being incurred we would be grateful if you would contact us within 7 days from the date of this letter to pay the balance. If you fail to contact us within the stated timeframe we will seek our clients instruction on issuing County Court proceedings.

We look forward to hearing from you within 7 days.

paulweller · 8 November 2016 at 12:36PM

And so I'm proposing I send them something on these lines...

Dear Sir or Madam:

With regard to your letter dated 2nd November 2016, once again, I deny any debt to your client, Vehicle Control Services LTD. (VCS LTD)

I have previously informed both yourselves and your client VCS LTD that while I am the registered keeper of the vehicle, I was not the driver at the time of the alleged offence.

In order for me to assist you further, please provide suitable evidence to support your claim. For the avoidance of doubt, it is the claimants’ responsibility to prove their case.

As you have quoted Elliot vs. Loake, in the interest of narrowing the issues and achieving the overriding objective, I require you to release the irrefutable evidence of the drivers identity that they must have.

I am aware that the legal case does not create any presumption of the drivers identity, as the senior Barrister Henry Greenslade confirmed this in 2015.

Your misrepresentation of this legal case against an unrepresented consumer has been noted, and appropriate complaints raised with the SRA and CSA.

If such evidence is not received within 14 days of the date of service of this letter, that the matter will be considered closed. A refusal to send through such evidence will be considered unreasonable behavior.

Yours sincerely
xxxxx

Castle · 8 November 2016 at 12:49PM

You may want to include reference to this very recent case where a judge ruled that Elliot v Loake was not applicable; since BW Legal was involved:-
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/excel-parking-youve-been-gladstoned.html

6 Years n and I've Got a PCN...?

Comments

Categories

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