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
    • CEC16
    • By CEC16 28th May 19, 8:51 PM
    • 15Posts
    • 14Thanks
    CEC16
    Bw legal portswood car park, southampton
    • #1
    • 28th May 19, 8:51 PM
    Bw legal portswood car park, southampton 28th May 19 at 8:51 PM
    LOOKING FOR SOME ADVICE,

    Apparently a vehicle that I was the registered keeper of in July 2018 was parked for 11 minutes over the permitted 2 hour window, I wasnt the driver, and im not aware who was either, could have been any of 3 other members of the house who are users of the car, its May 2019, and quite honestly working out who was in the car last year in July is a problem. Ive been called literally every day for weeks on end by BW LEGAL, had countless letters, most of which ive filed in the bin, and others that ive kept. Ive even blocked there number, but somehow they manage to get through to leave a voicemail!? (can i request a copy of the call logs from them? legally are they obliged to tell me, Id like to counter charge them for stress and wasting my valuable life minutes

    Im not scared to go to court for this at all, never been to one in my life. So might be a new experience. ?

    Call me naieve maybe, Im just planning on going with the flow, going to court if that is what is going happen and appeal to someones better nature and common sense that 11 minutes is a bit of a tight schedule to arrive, park, get back, get in and leave....the crime!! took place in July 2018, Ive ignored pretty much everything eventually I filled in a form and opted that i dont wish to mediate, and that I want the case moved to southampton, Ive heard from southampton to say they have recieved this request.......and today i got a letter from BW legal again, inviting me to call dispute resolution, the letter highlights the : Background, The BREACH, my response, etc etc etc

    Theres a copy of an expenditure form in case i cant afford the £239.48 fine

    A photo of a car number plate and a section of the front of a car with a number plate.The photo shows a 11 minute time over the 2 hours

    Photos of some signs in a car park, not sure which car park, presumably the Portswood Car Park These photos were taken in Feb 2018, before the crime even happened !?

    Theres a letter thats headed -

    "Without prejudice save as to costs"
    dated the 22 May 2019
    Offering for me to PAY £170, within 14 days
    and i will not be pursued any further.

    if i don't, they are instructed to proceed with a view to obtaining a county court judgement. for the full balance plus costs, and interest.

    Will i actually get the chance to go to court and speak my mind? or is all of this just going to be a paper and button pressing exercise, its probably pretty clear to anyone reading this that im not exactly very knowledgeable about this aspect of "Life" Just your average hard working, tax paying individual getting ever more hacked off with automation, and the money scamming organisations that bleed money from anywhere possible, and furthermore do NOTHING, to support the needs of the struggling local businesses that will only suffer at the loss of people who simply wont bother to park there anymore.
Page 2
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 13th Jun 19, 6:23 PM
    • 12,525 Posts
    • 17,454 Thanks
    beamerguy
    Thanks, we can use that to say in defences as a standard ending:
    Originally posted by Coupon-mad
    I have added this info to the BWL failure page

    Be interesting to if a judge goes against a District Judge ?
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 13th Jun 19, 6:25 PM
    • 76,465 Posts
    • 89,803 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I will add it to the next edit of the NEWBIES thread soon!

    All people will need is bargepole's concise defence for most cases plus a paragraph covering their own facts about the parking event/signs or hybrid 'CN' or byelaws or whatever, then end their defence with the longer ending as shown above.

    I think it's high time some local court areas starting banning claims from the likes of Britannia or UKCPM, or just stopped Gladstones & BW Legal from filing claims without permission (at cost, so the courts are not out of pocket).
    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
    • Mahershalalhashbaz
    • By Mahershalalhashbaz 14th Jun 19, 1:20 PM
    • 23 Posts
    • 39 Thanks
    Mahershalalhashbaz
    Had a call from BW legal on Friday last week, asking me if id recieved their "offer" to pay £170...and had I given it any further considertation....
    Originally posted by CEC16
    TODAY, home from work, and a letter has arrived.
    Its Headed
    GENERAL FORM OF JUDGMENT OR ORDER In the Southampton County Court
    Claim number XXXXXXXX
    Date 10th June 2019
    Britannia PArking group ltd, T/A Brittania parking 1st claimant REF XXXXXXX
    MY Name 1st Defendant Ref
    Before District Judge Taylor sitting at the County Court at Southampton London Road Southampton IT IS ORDERED THAT
    The claim is struck out as an abuse of process
    Originally posted by CEC16
    Presumably BW Legal were aware that their claim had been struck out when they nonetheless approached the defendant for £170 to settle the case. This would seem to take abuse of process to a whole new level.
    Last edited by Mahershalalhashbaz; 14-06-2019 at 1:24 PM.
    • Fruitcake
    • By Fruitcake 14th Jun 19, 1:23 PM
    • 40,592 Posts
    • 90,146 Thanks
    Fruitcake
    Presumably BW Legal were aware that their claim had been struck out when they nonetheless approached the defendant for £170 to settle the case. This would seem to take abuse of procedure to a whole new level.
    Originally posted by Mahershalalhashbaz
    Gosh, are you suggesting that the scamlicitors this upstanding legal company were acting in an underhand manner?

    Perish the thought.
    I married my cousin. I had to...
    I don't have a sister.

    All my screwdrivers are cordless.
    "You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 14th Jun 19, 2:56 PM
    • 12,525 Posts
    • 17,454 Thanks
    beamerguy
    Presumably BW Legal were aware that their claim had been struck out when they nonetheless approached the defendant for £170 to settle the case. This would seem to take abuse of process to a whole new level.
    Originally posted by Mahershalalhashbaz
    No doubt .... but, we are talking about BWLegal here and NOT professionals by any stretch
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • Mahershalalhashbaz
    • By Mahershalalhashbaz 14th Jun 19, 3:41 PM
    • 23 Posts
    • 39 Thanks
    Mahershalalhashbaz
    Gosh, are you suggesting that the scamlicitors this upstanding legal company were acting in an underhand manner?

    Perish the thought.
    Originally posted by Fruitcake
    No doubt .... but, we are talking about BWLegal here and NOT professionals by any stretch
    Originally posted by beamerguy
    As I look forward to my day in the same court to defend myself against a claim relating to the same car park, this thread provides useful insights into those bringing the case against me.

    It does seem an indictment of the justice system if such underhand activity by BWLegal should go without sanction.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 14th Jun 19, 5:15 PM
    • 76,465 Posts
    • 89,803 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Agreed, and I am so fed up with the scammers that the above example ending for any defence accuses them of being vexatious litigants, in the hope that at least one pee'd off Judge might just take up the mantle without expecting a Defendant to fund an expensive application.
    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
    • CEC16
    • By CEC16 9th Jul 19, 5:42 PM
    • 15 Posts
    • 14 Thanks
    CEC16
    Just a little update, still no response from the SRA, in fairness they do have a few days left to be able to reply. In the meantime I have contacted BW Legal, Under the GDPR rules I have requested a copy of every singl;e piece of correspondence they have sent me, The details of my Account, and a list of every phone call they have made, answered or not. Not sure what exactly Im going to do with this yet, any ideas
    • CEC16
    • By CEC16 17th Jul 19, 5:18 PM
    • 15 Posts
    • 14 Thanks
    CEC16
    Another update

    Got another General Form of judgement or order in the post today

    it reads

    Before His Honour Judge Iain Hughes QC sitting at Winchester County Court at Winchester, The law courts, Winchester

    UPON reading the file


    This is an application to set aside the order of the District Judge Taylor dated 23rd May 2019
    The order was made on the initiative of the court. The Claimant did not attend and is entitled to apply to have the order set aside.

    This and any similar applcations are to be listed before a full time district judge, sitting at Southampton time estimate 30 minutes, first open date.

    Dated 16th July 2019


    So, what does that mean?
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 17th Jul 19, 5:40 PM
    • 17,871 Posts
    • 21,768 Thanks
    KeithP
    Firstly, I am not a lawyer.

    But it looks to me that His Honour Judge Iain Hughes QC has decided that the 'abuse of process' Order, see post #10 above, should not have been made.

    It also suggests that similar Orders, possibly others in Southampton and those in Newport IOW, should also be set aside.

    I don't know what you should do about it though.
    Last edited by KeithP; 17-07-2019 at 5:44 PM.
    .
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 17th Jul 19, 5:51 PM
    • 76,465 Posts
    • 89,803 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    It means BW Legal have challenged the order of DJ Taylor and want a prelim hearing about costs and DJ Hughes has had no reason to disallow that right. Sounds like they might be bunching together more than one case to explore the matter of the fake costs in these cases:
    This and any similar applications are to be listed before a full time district judge, sitting at Southampton time estimate 30 minutes, first open date.
    If you get a date, go along armed with evidence that the costs can't be claimed (use POFA wording, POFA Guidance from the DFT in 2012, the stated Trade Body ceiling of £100 in the two CoPs, the DRP page that says that they do parking cases for free 'no recovery, no fee' and the Beavis case where the Judges talked about the business model more than covering the costs of the letter chain...).

    They can't charge twice for those letters. But they will, if they win this hearing and then they will refer to it in future. We can't have that.

    High time this was aired properly but it needs the Defendants to turn up, otherwise BW Legal might send a barrister to steer the Judge up a garden path. We need voices of dissent at that hearing.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 17-07-2019 at 5:57 PM.
    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
    • Egbert Nobacon
    • By Egbert Nobacon 17th Jul 19, 10:10 PM
    • 335 Posts
    • 588 Thanks
    Egbert Nobacon
    I have read there were nearly 7 million DVLA keeper requests in the last year.
    If we assume there were one million cases where the extra £60 was added that is a tremendous amount these solicitors stand to lose.
    It would be amazing if they were just to roll over and accept this judgment.

    They would be mad not to send a barrister to try to get this overturned.
    If the OP attends they would likely be at a disadvantage against an experienced opponent.

    With so much at stake the OP could do with some legal help in court.
    Perhaps those with legal training may be able to help or some form of crowdfunding to pay any bills.

    BTW I understand that parking charges are not subject to VAT but surely this £60 they have been charging should.
    If I get a Solicitor’s bill it always adds on the VAT.

    What do others think ?
    • Egbert Nobacon
    • By Egbert Nobacon 18th Jul 19, 10:14 PM
    • 335 Posts
    • 588 Thanks
    Egbert Nobacon
    Just bumping this up so it doesn’t get lost.

    This is possibly the most important forum thread at the moment.
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 19th Jul 19, 8:19 AM
    • 12,525 Posts
    • 17,454 Thanks
    beamerguy
    Does this not mean that until there is a ruling, all BWL cases should be set aside ?

    At the moment POPFA 2012 is the law stating that Schedule 4.5

    The maximum sum which may be recovered from the keeper by virtue of the right conferred by this paragraph is the amount specified in the notice to keeper under paragraph 8(2)(c) or (d) or, as the case may be
    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted

    The public accept our laws as they dictate what is right or wrong. Surely a county court judge cannot change the law and even if it went to the Supreme court, they have already ruled that £85 is an acceptable amount
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 19th Jul 19, 9:51 AM
    • 12,525 Posts
    • 17,454 Thanks
    beamerguy

    BTW I understand that parking charges are not subject to VAT but surely this £60 they have been charging should.
    If I get a Solicitorís bill it always adds on the VAT.

    What do others think ?
    Originally posted by Egbert Nobacon
    I agree, a solicitor offers a service

    The problem is that BWL has described the £60 in many ways, such as admin charges, contractual costs, legal costs, debt collector costs ?

    WHAT IS IT ?

    All this leads to the fact that they apply charges adlib with no particular reason apart from extra profit on a fixed charge.
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • Egbert Nobacon
    • By Egbert Nobacon 19th Jul 19, 3:04 PM
    • 335 Posts
    • 588 Thanks
    Egbert Nobacon
    agree, a solicitor offers a service

    The problem is that BWL has described the £60 in many ways, such as admin charges, contractual costs, legal costs, debt collector costs ?

    WHAT IS IT ?

    All this leads to the fact that they apply charges adlib with no particular reason apart from extra profit on a fixed charge.

    Perhaps an email to Sir Greg Knight and HMRC might stir things up a bit.
    Worth a try.
    • noneofyour
    • By noneofyour 19th Jul 19, 7:15 PM
    • 14 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    noneofyour
    They do change the wording as in the letter I read it says Total Debt Recovery Costs: £60. Further down "our client's entitlement to the total debt recovery costs reffered to in the table above is expressed in the Terms and conditions, which you accepted upon entering the site. Such costs are recoverable in any event under the relevant Parking Codes of pratice" . I thought the these costs are not recoverable? I'm really confused with the whole law jargon.
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 19th Jul 19, 7:19 PM
    • 17,871 Posts
    • 21,768 Thanks
    KeithP
    Do the signs say "costs of £60 will be added"?

    If there is no mention of the amount, i.e. £60, in the contract, i.e. on the signs, then that £60 is not recoverable.

    Do not believe everything the other party may tell you.
    .
    • noneofyour
    • By noneofyour 19th Jul 19, 7:26 PM
    • 14 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    noneofyour
    I am still learning not to believe everything...
    But the letter I read seems to have more info than other I saw here e.g the Pre-Action Protocol For Debt Claims and that the letter is being sent in accordance with the Civil Procedure Rules Pre action Protocol for debt claims. I've not seen this being added in other letters?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 19th Jul 19, 8:04 PM
    • 76,465 Posts
    • 89,803 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    That's normal; always stated in a proper LBC giving 30 days and reply forms.

    This is CEC16's own thread about his/her case though.

    CEC16 please update me by pm as to the date of the prelim hearing when you get it, as some of us PCN fighters in the South might want to support you in putting your side, as this is important to win.

    If you get a pm from a new poster (not thousands of posts) don't answer it, but tell us. You do not want randoms turning up so maybe pm me the date.

    Others will confirm I am 100% trustworthy and I do help people for free.
    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

194Posts Today

2,629Users online

Martin's Twitter