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
    • mixMZ
    • By mixMZ 1st Dec 18, 4:08 PM
    • 21Posts
    • 3Thanks
    mixMZ
    2 separate letters from BW Legal - Britannia Parking
    • #1
    • 1st Dec 18, 4:08 PM
    2 separate letters from BW Legal - Britannia Parking 1st Dec 18 at 4:08 PM
    Hi

    Came back from holiday and got 2 letters from BW Legal - on behalf of Britannia Parking Limited.

    They are both "Letter of Claim" dated the same: 14 November 2018 and referring to 2 different "Contraventions"
    One is for 27 October 2016 and the second one is for 23 December 2016.
    Both Letters referring to the same Contravention Location/Description: West Quay Retail Park Southampton / Failed to display a valid P&D ticket ot Permit.
    In both cases they asking for a payment of £130 to be made by 19th December 2018.

    Breakdown on estimated Court fees are as follow:

    Principal Debt+Initial Legal Costs £130.00
    Estimated Interest £11.48 (the other one for 23 Dec is £10.60)
    Estimated Court Fees £25.00
    Estimated Solicitor`s Costs £ 50.00
    Total: £216.48 (second one: £215.60)

    I scanned that letter and uploaded on google drive:

    drive.google.com/drive/folders/1gKgnxXiVoK66A5dH34hbfrXFKK9HeWIU


    Thing is that I personally do not remember any parking tickets, but during that time ,access to my car had also my ex and her brother who I am not in touch with anymore, so my defense might be a bit tricky...

    What do you advice, should I respond to those letters individually with the same "Response" but in different time frame to see how the first one goes?
    English is not my first Language so its a bit stressful have to say...
Page 3
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 13th Jan 19, 2:34 PM
    • 13,708 Posts
    • 15,005 Thanks
    KeithP
    Do the AoS for each individually.

    Write a Defence for each individually.
    Obviously each Defence will be identical in substance, but in each mention the other claim and make the point that the Claimant is abusing the process by issuing two claims.
    .
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 13th Jan 19, 5:31 PM
    • 68,768 Posts
    • 80,994 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    what about my previous question:

    Both CCBC claims / PCNs relate to same car park and are worded same way (only difference is amount claimed that differs by aporx £2)
    should I do AOS for both claims individually or should I somehow try to consolidate them into 1 claim?
    Originally posted by mixMZ
    You then do this, like you will see in all similar double claim threads:

    https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=75304612#post75304612

    Keep at it as there is no way the courts should sanction duplicate hearings.
    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
    • mixMZ
    • By mixMZ 21st Jan 19, 6:04 PM
    • 21 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    mixMZ
    Ready to submit my defence:

    DEFENCE

    1. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.

    2. The Defendant is the registered keeper of the vehicle in question. The particulars of the claim, state the legal basis is brought against the Defendant for ‘breach of terms of parking’ by the driver. 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 when parking at Southampton - West Quay Retail Park, on xx/xx/2016 at 15:39

    2.1. Any breach is denied, and it is further denied that there was any agreement to pay the Claimant's £70 'Parking Charge Notice ('PCN')'.

    3. The Particulars of Claim state that the Defendant; was the registered keeper and/or the driver of the vehicle; Honda under registration xxxx. These assertions indicate that the Claimant has failed to identify a Cause of Action and is simply offering a menu of choices. As such, the Claim fails to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4, or with Civil Practice Direction 16, paras. 7.3 to 7.5.

    4. The Defendant is the registered keeper of the vehicle. ‘Keeper liability’ under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (“the POFA”) is dependent upon full compliance with that Act. It is submitted that the Claimant’s Parking Charge Notice and/or Notice to Keeper failed to comply with the statutory wording and/or deadlines set by the POFA. Any non-compliance voids any right to ‘keeper liability’.

    5. 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.

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

    7. In addition to the original PCN penalty, for which liability is denied, the Claimants have artificially inflated the value of the Claim by adding purported added 'costs' of £60. Not only are such costs not permitted (CPR 27.14) but the Defendant believes that the Claimant has not incurred legal costs.

    8. The Claimant may try to rely upon ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67. However, with no 'legitimate interest' excuse for charging this unconscionable sum given the above facts, this Claimant is fully aware that their claim is reduced to an unrecoverable penalty and must fail.

    9. The Claimant may try to rely on Combined Parking Solutions Ltd v AJH Films Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 1453.. However the vehicle is not registered to the Defendant as a company vehicle and there is no Employer liability holding the Defendant liable for the actions of the Driver.

    10. 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.

    11. Claimant is abusing the process by issuing additional claim: xxxxx
    Both claims should have been filed as one single claim as the facts are duplicated.

    Should the Court agree and combine the cases, defence in claim no. xxxx will suffice as a 'test case' defence to represent both cases and save duplication and the court's time.


    I believe the facts contained in this Defence are true.
    • mixMZ
    • By mixMZ 21st Jan 19, 7:54 PM
    • 21 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    mixMZ
    specially if that part is correct

    11. Claimant is abusing the process by issuing additional claim: xxxxx
    Both claims should have been filed as one single claim as the facts are duplicated.

    Should the Court agree and combine the cases, defence in claim no. xxxx will suffice as a 'test case' defence to represent both cases and save duplication and the court's time.

    Originally posted by mixMZ
    thx
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 22nd Jan 19, 1:38 AM
    • 68,768 Posts
    • 80,994 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Looks good to me.

    All that's missing is an objection to the total (the stupid, made up 'costs') claimed and in your case you could lump the 2 claim totals together when you talk about £200 (x 2 PCNs) being inflated to an eye-watering £xxx.xx like this:

    https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=75304578#post75304578

    ...because in your case why should you be liable for two sets of court fees, plus those made up costs that don't exist, to the tune of (probably) over £500 in play?!

    You can use that wording, just adapt the total to show the total of both claims (and make it clear that's where the figure comes from).
    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
    • mixMZ
    • By mixMZ 15th Feb 19, 8:33 PM
    • 21 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    mixMZ
    Just a quick update.
    Received DQs for both claims directly from BWlegal as expected.
    I have just received DQs for those claims also from CCBC - obviously in separate posts.

    Can someone please clarify couple things for me.

    On the Notice of Proposed Allocation to the Small Claims Track it says I need to complete form N180 and file it with the court office (CCBC) and serve copies on all other parties.

    1. So do I just fill that attached form from CCBC that and send it back to CCBC + I do print off additional form (copy) and send it separately to BWLegal or just send both forms to CCBC ?

    2. Section B - Do i have to write my mobile/telephone number ? - I dont mind providing that to court but as both forms needs to be exact the same I am just worried I may start to receive calls from BWlegal and I dont want them to know my number.

    3. I noticed that on DQs I received from BWlegal they stated they do agreee for mediation service and also confirmed in section E they havent included fee with this form - as its bwlegal / britania both tickets from 2016 - non POFA compliant - at what stage they will back of? If i remember correctly Coupon-mad mentioned somewhere that Britania dont go to Courts

    4. Can I send those DQs for both claims together or they need to be sent separately?
    Last edited by mixMZ; 15-02-2019 at 8:44 PM.
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 15th Feb 19, 8:54 PM
    • 13,708 Posts
    • 15,005 Thanks
    KeithP
    It really is simple.

    Send each completed DQ to the CCBC using the same email address and the same manner as you sent your Defence.
    Refresh your memory by re-reading post #38 above.

    Send a copy of each completed DQ to the Claimant - address on each Claim Form.

    Remember to remind the CCBC, and of course the Claimant, that these two claims should be combined at the earliest opportunity.

    You don't need to provide a mobile telephone number.
    Last edited by KeithP; 15-02-2019 at 8:57 PM.
    .
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

2,235Posts Today

6,933Users online

Martin's Twitter