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
    • Palec
    • By Palec 4th Aug 18, 1:13 AM
    • 133Posts
    • 35Thanks
    Palec
    Letter of claim from bwlegal
    • #1
    • 4th Aug 18, 1:13 AM
    Letter of claim from bwlegal 4th Aug 18 at 1:13 AM
    Hello,

    I posted here my case in 2014, with replies not to pay and come back if the matter goes to court for proper defence as I appealed at a time and lost, now PPS want 160 for 8 minutes which took us to pay another 1 for extended parking...
    I was reading about new law and excessive charges plus mitigating factors, well landowner has changed since then, PPS is not operating where we got fine in 2014...
    Letter says to pay or I can be taken to court, just came from holiday, seems 30 days deadline I will not manage to reply, so if they decide to take me to court, will defend then as previously I was writing here about debt collectors who contacted me and in the past I have offered 10 for 8 minutes, because we have got proof from expired ticket and new ticket we purchased...
    Mitigating factors should be considered by court I believe, so plan is waiting until court and defend in writing...
    Any advice please? Please have a look at my post re PPS from 2014/2015, as now after 2.5 years they contacted me again.
    Thank you.
Page 3
    • Thorsson
    • By Thorsson 6th Aug 18, 11:54 AM
    • 146 Posts
    • 71 Thanks
    Thorsson
    Modified my post (thanks for the heads up) but obviously cannot change OP's post. I did, in the bottom of my post suggest proof reading by OP
    Originally posted by Le_Kirk
    Sorry, wasn't having a go; I think there are more problems than just some clumsy English. I started trying to sort it out and realised that it is missing information that would help it make sense.

    For instance, we are told the machine was not accepting coins and then suddenly we jump to paying 1 for another ticket. How is the reader supposed to fill in the gap?
    • Le_Kirk
    • By Le_Kirk 6th Aug 18, 1:22 PM
    • 3,416 Posts
    • 2,372 Thanks
    Le_Kirk
    Sorry, wasn't having a go;
    Originally posted by Thorsson
    No worries, didn't think you were.
    • Palec
    • By Palec 6th Aug 18, 9:18 PM
    • 133 Posts
    • 35 Thanks
    Palec
    Well we used to park there on regular basis and had to insert coins more times to go through.
    Maybe I will not use this argument as I did not mentioned it in my Popla appeal, either, so that it could be counted that I am making up stories...
    • Palec
    • By Palec 6th Aug 18, 9:21 PM
    • 133 Posts
    • 35 Thanks
    Palec
    I am probably using descriptive English as for the situation around it, translating thoughts and facts as I remember them, am trying my best, I have got deadline today, been abroad, so as soon as I came posted it here...
    • Palec
    • By Palec 6th Aug 18, 9:28 PM
    • 133 Posts
    • 35 Thanks
    Palec
    Thank you Thorsson, original posts and links you can find as per //2
    • Palec
    • By Palec 6th Aug 18, 9:36 PM
    • 133 Posts
    • 35 Thanks
    Palec
    As for Daniel San suggestion, well letter of claim I received contain info sheet, reply form, except from expenditure and mentions protocol etc, so it seems the other part is learning from their mistakes with plenty of court claims their client is submitting, so maybe it is getting more difficult to defend.
    ( I have to admit it is not easy for me because I was not expecting this hassle for 10 minutes of being late due to poor health omitting faulty machine)...
    • Palec
    • By Palec 6th Aug 18, 9:38 PM
    • 133 Posts
    • 35 Thanks
    Palec
    As I was told only court can consider mitigating factors, I will send whatever I put together based on advise here as deadline is midnight tonight and see...
    Any comments before than are appreciated, many thanks.
    • Palec
    • By Palec 6th Aug 18, 9:54 PM
    • 133 Posts
    • 35 Thanks
    Palec
    Simple letter as answer
    Dear Sirs,

    Thank you for your letter of (date)
    When your client's debt collectors first started contacting me, I asked them for details of the basis upon which money was being claimed. Extraordinarily, I was told by DRP that no such evidence would be provided. I tried to come to an agreement with your client without any luck as they refused 10 for 10 minutes and asked for 100 from previous 60. I could not contact landowner directly to sort it out as landowners changed at a time, too.
    All this caused significant distress to me and my family for over 12 months.

    I was not feeling well enough to drive, so I paid another 1 (for another ticket) and have proof it was done 10 minutes after first ticket expired.

    You have now sent a Letter of Claim. However, your letter contains insufficient detail of the claim and, again, fails to provide the photographic evidence which I requested as long ago as 2014/ 2015. No cause of action is stated. Nor does it contain any mention of what evidence your client intends to rely on, or enclose copies of such evidence.




    This action on the part of your client is a clear breach of its pre-action obligations set out in the Practice Direction - Pre-Action Conduct, with which as solicitors you must surely be familiar (and with which your client, a serial litigator of small claims, must also be familiar). As you (and your client) must know, the Practice Direction binds all potential litigants, whatever the size or type of the claim. Its express purpose is to assist parties in understanding the claim and their respective positions in relation to it, to enable parties to take stock of their positions and to negotiate a settlement, or at least narrow the issues, without incurring the costs of court proceedings or using up valuable court time.


    Nobody, including your client, is immune from the requirements and obligations of the Practice Direction. Your client cannot simply refuse to provide the relevant information "until this gets to court" [or whatever they said].

    I require your client to comply with its obligations by sending me the following information/documents:

    1. an explanation of the cause of action
    2. whether they are pursuing me as driver or keeper
    3. whether they are relying on the provisions of Schedule 4 of POFA 2012
    4. what the details of the claim are (where it is claimed the car was parked, for how long, how the monies being claimed arose and have been calculated, what contractual breach (if any) is being claimed)
    5. a copy of the contract with the landowner under which they assert authority to bring the claim
    6. a copy of any alleged contract with the driver
    7. a plan showing where any signs were displayed
    8. details of the signs displayed (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed)
    9. If they have added anything on to the original charge, what that represents and how it has been calculated.

    I am clearly entitled to this information under paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction. I also need it in order to comply with my own obligations under paragraph 6(b).



    Until your client has complied with its obligations and provided this information, I am unable to respond properly to the alleged claim and to consider my position in relation to it, and it is entirely premature (and a waste of costs and court time) for your client to issue proceedings. Should your client do so, then I will seek an immediate stay pursuant to paragraph 15(b) of the Practice Direction and an order that this information is provided.

    Yours faithfully,
    XY
    • Palec
    • By Palec 6th Aug 18, 11:19 PM
    • 133 Posts
    • 35 Thanks
    Palec
    Thank you everybody for your help, will inform you about news, soon.
    • Palec
    • By Palec 10th Aug 18, 10:29 AM
    • 133 Posts
    • 35 Thanks
    Palec
    Reply from BW legal to my letter
    Good Morning



    Thank you for your recent email, the contents of which have been noted on file.



    Please be advised that you have previously appealed this matter directly to Our Client.



    Our Client rejected your appeal and sent you an appeal rejection letter. This letter outlined reasons for the rejection, you then appealed further with POPLA which still was not upheld. No more appeals can be made after this, the full Balance is Due.



    Our Client's cause of action is that you breached the terms and conditions of the contract which you entered into by parking your vehicle in the car park, by failing to display a valid Pay & Display Ticket (PDT).


    Our Client is pursuing you as the registered keeper of the vehicle.


    Our Client does intend to reply on Schedule 4 of Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.


    The details of the claim are that your vehicle parked without displaying a valid PDT.


    The Parking Charge Notice (PCN) which you have been issued with is for a breach of contract. The only right which you have to enter the land in question are on the terms and conditions which apply. It is unnecessary to apply an analysis of offer, acceptance and consideration quite simply because the contract was formed on mutual promises. By parking your vehicle in the car park you have entered into a unilateral contract with Our Client. Acceptance does not have to be communicated, the act of parking your vehicle is acceptance.


    This is not a claim for trespass.


    Please be aware that the contract between Our Client and the landowner is a legally privileged document which you have no right to inspect. However, should this matter progress to court, the contract will be adduced as evidence.


    Our Client is under no obligation to supply this.


    As established members of the Independent Parking Committee, Our Client adheres to their Code of Practice for Private Enforcement on Private Land and Unregulated Car Parks ('Code of Practice'). This Code of Practice gives recommendations in regards to the signage within the Car Park. The signs within the car park comply with the recommendations in the Code of Practice and are therefore deemed reasonable.


    100.00 remains unpaid for the Parking Charge Notice. Additionally, you are also liable for our 60.00 instructions fee as your file has been passed to us.


    This will be issued in due course.


    Accordingly, the full Balance is Due.



    Please contact us within 7 days of the date of this email to discuss repayment.





    Should you have any queries please contact our office or alternatively sign in or register on our Online Customer Portal at www.bwlegal.co.uk.



    Kind Regards,



    bwlegal
    • Palec
    • By Palec 10th Aug 18, 11:12 AM
    • 133 Posts
    • 35 Thanks
    Palec
    Any ideas?
    Hello everyone, any ideas in this stage?
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 10th Aug 18, 12:10 PM
    • 38,012 Posts
    • 22,107 Thanks
    Quentin
    This is a debt collecting attempt

    Debt collectors letters are covered in the newbies FAQ thread #4

    Ignore everything except a lbcca or Court correspondence

    If it comes to this then come to the newbies FAQ thread for advice. #2 there covers Court claims right through from the lbcca to the hearing
    • Palec
    • By Palec 10th Aug 18, 12:13 PM
    • 133 Posts
    • 35 Thanks
    Palec
    Thank you Quentin, their first letter was named as letter of claim saying they will take me to court and I replied with copy above and this is their reply again...
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 10th Aug 18, 12:19 PM
    • 38,012 Posts
    • 22,107 Thanks
    Quentin
    A letter of claim is not a claim.

    Wait and see if you get a claim from Court.
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 10th Aug 18, 1:06 PM
    • 4,158 Posts
    • 5,012 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    Also, you gave one hour for a response, on a weekday
    DONT rush so fast

    The letter makes a number of errors. States YOU broke the terms, but theyre pursuing you as keeper. So YOU didnt breach.

    Did you get copies of the documents you asked for? If not, which ones are missing? An OBVIOUS response would be to tell them they have failed their PAP obligations and failed to provide the se documents .... which obviously must already be in their possession, before taking the instructions

    They have stated you are liable for their instruction fee of 60, but you require them to substnatiate how this is possible, given POFA VERY CLEARLY and UNAMBIGUOUSLY limits a Keepers liability to the amount on the NtK, and legal fees are not reclaimable in small claims. You require a full explanation of this. Refusal, or vague allusions to POFA without a specific reference to the schedule and para that allows this, plus how your intepretation differes to that of the COurts, will reuslt in a complaint to the SRA that you are misleading a consumer.
    • Palec
    • By Palec 11th Aug 18, 7:53 AM
    • 133 Posts
    • 35 Thanks
    Palec
    Thank you Nosferatu. I did not get any documents except from reply from bw legal posted telling me need to reply within 7 days, first letter they gave me 30 days to reply but was not in country and after coming back was in a rush to catch deadline.
    I was reading newbie threads and whatever people advise me here, but some people advise to strongly reply second time and some to ignore their letter and wait for lbc, or lbcc ( not sure how to spell it ) basically letter from court is my understanding, which they been threatening me before as posted in 2014,2015 with debt collectors. Some people replied that it is debt collecting letter, but it is letter form solicitors on behalf of parking company, so it seems it will go to court, which I am not worried about as I would disclose mitigating factors which affect my driving as for medical conditions I am not willing to discuss with them beforehand as I do not take any medication, but was diagnosed by illness which I need to be careful when driving or take precaution before driving until I feel well and fit to do so, which was the case on that day, too with 10 minutes late, so I displayed valid ticket which expired and have proof that time between first and second is 10 minutes.
    So am not sure if to reply and what exactly or leave it until it goes to court, because is causing a lot of stress.

    I do not understand this part: Refusal, or vague allusions to POFA without a specific reference to the schedule and para that allows this, plus how your intepretation differes to that of the COurts, will reuslt in a complaint to the SRA that you are misleading a consumer. This means I can complain to SRA ( which is what?) because they done what? I do apologise, it is very confusing as from my point of view I just was 10 minutes late for a reason bought another ticket and they treat me like a criminal.
    Thank you for your time.
    • Palec
    • By Palec 11th Aug 18, 8:00 AM
    • 133 Posts
    • 35 Thanks
    Palec
    The problem is I was reading that if I failed Popla appeal, which I did, as put it as excessive amount they are asking for and now as they won that courtcase I forgot the name where they won against guy they sent me another letter, which they probably can within 6 years legal limit, after which I could put limitation defence I suppose.
    The other guy extended parking over 50 minutes I believe, so 10 minutes should be different for a reason, but my argument with popla omitted me feeling unfit to drive in relation to my health, so that I lost it, as newbie, it was my fault, but do not want to spread out my health problems in the past etc...I was reading this is something court can take into consideration if it goes to court, but if I did not mention it in Popla appeal, it can go against me. So if I lose court case which I believe will not happen as I wanted to pay 10 for 10 minutes as offer back in 2014, court will not maybe scrap it but give me certain amount not 100 or 160.
    Any thoughts on this please?
    I have to say it starts to make me feel sick, maybe I do not cope with stress so well, but I feel really bullied and discriminated, evenso am not classed as disabled I believe, but can they send me letters in 2015 threatening me with court then stop it and then start again because of that case they won I mentioned above?
    • Palec
    • By Palec 11th Aug 18, 8:03 AM
    • 133 Posts
    • 35 Thanks
    Palec
    I would not have problem paying if it is fair, paid in the past and done it in London as it was my fault after taking advice on this forum, but if it is within 10 minutes law should be changed like when one gets ticket within city council car park, but we cannot change the law here, maybe suggest something to local MP in areas we live...
    • Palec
    • By Palec 11th Aug 18, 1:11 PM
    • 133 Posts
    • 35 Thanks
    Palec
    I would like to know who does think I should ignore second letter from bw legal and who does think I should reply strongly or what expression is used in this forum to them...Thank you
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 11th Aug 18, 2:12 PM
    • 38,012 Posts
    • 22,107 Thanks
    Quentin
    You have nothing to lose by sending another rebuttal if you want to

    And equally nothing to lose by waiting and seeing if they do issue a claim
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

1,602Posts Today

5,970Users online

Martin's Twitter