PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Help with Wright Hassall, Threads merged
alexsyl
post Tue, 12 Apr 2016 - 08:13
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 113
Joined: 12 Apr 2016
Member No.: 83,633



Hi all,

Apologies in advance - I'm new here and I know there are countless topics regarding these issues but I'm not sure what to do next.

In November 2015 I parked in the Abbey Walk car park in Selby (the Sainsburys one, in case anyone knows it). It was always free to park and is close to the town centre, as I was meeting a couple of friends for some food there. I arrived at around 7pm ish and left around 10.30.

I didn't think anything of it, so imagine my surprise when I received a letter from ZZPS dated 19th February 2016 saying I had an unpaid parking fine from the above. Turns out this car park is now managed by Vehicle Control Services on an ANPR sheme, which is not exactly well publicised (and by that I mean I couldnt see any signs up in the car park regarding said parking restrictions). I had never received any prior correspondence from VCS to advise that I had a parking fine or anything like that.

I wrote to both ZZPS and VCS, on the same day, disputing the charge as I had never received any prior notification and therefore could not appeal within the initial given period. I did originally research on here and a couple of other websites to help me gain some content for said letters, so said that I would not pay ZZPS as it's all speculative invoices, is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss, and there is significant lack of signage in the car park to show the parking restrictions.

I got the usual templated b*llocks letter back, refusing to answer any of my points that I raised, so I wrote to them again to deny the debt to ZZPS and refuse to deal with ZZPS, and demanded they respond fully to the issues and points that I raised in my initial letter, saying that if I didnt hear from them within 14 days then I'd consider the matter closed.

So, yesterday, I receive a letter in the post from Wright Hassall, dated 29th March (but only arrived yesterday - convenient?) - which I have scanned and attached. This looks different to the usual WH templated letters that I have seen people posting about on here and elsewhere - so I am completely unsure how to respond.

Obviously I want to completely stand my ground and have no intention of paying this - I'm just worried about it getting to the CCJ stage.

Is there anyone who could please provide me with some help on how to respond to this WH letter? I'm a bit of a newbie with these kinds of things so anything in laymans terms would be much appreciated.

Thank you!

This post has been edited by alexsyl: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 - 11:12
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
9 Pages V  « < 6 7 8 9 >  
Start new topic
Replies (140 - 159)
Advertisement
post Tue, 12 Apr 2016 - 08:13
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
alexsyl
post Fri, 29 Jun 2018 - 11:17
Post #141


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 113
Joined: 12 Apr 2016
Member No.: 83,633



The 2 week extension has been given on advice from a conversation I had with the ICO this morning. They have advised that in most circumstances you should be reasonable with the company and give them a "second chance" to respond, effectively. If you haven't done this first then they are less likely to take your complaint favourably
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
publicenemyno1
post Sat, 30 Jun 2018 - 07:56
Post #142


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 104
Joined: 18 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,938



This sort of thing frustrates me. Is it 30 days or actually 44, then?

No doubt BW Legal would not give you an extra 2 weeks if you owed them money legitimately!

This post has been edited by publicenemyno1: Sat, 30 Jun 2018 - 07:56
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
alexsyl
post Mon, 2 Jul 2018 - 07:44
Post #143


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 113
Joined: 12 Apr 2016
Member No.: 83,633



Yeah I know, its tedious. To be fair though the person at the ICO was helpful, its 30 days in the first instance and then your'e supposed to play nice - I've ended up only giving them 10 days which I decided was more than reasonable, so if I don't hear from them by then, complaint it is
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
alexsyl
post Thu, 12 Jul 2018 - 07:51
Post #144


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 113
Joined: 12 Apr 2016
Member No.: 83,633



No responses from either VCS or BWL following my SARs - even with the 10 extra days they were given.

Will be raising formal complaints to the ICO this morning.

Do you think it is worthwhile sending them both letters to say something to this effect? OR just let the ICO deal with it now?

Many thanks
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Thu, 12 Jul 2018 - 08:49
Post #145


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,855
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



Leave it to the ICO

I suspect that the response will be along the lines that VCS and BWL are entitled to your information because they believe you owe a payment

The companies apologise for the delay but are dealing with a vastly increased number of SAR enquiries since GDPR eliminated the £10 charge

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
alexsyl
post Thu, 12 Jul 2018 - 10:20
Post #146


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 113
Joined: 12 Apr 2016
Member No.: 83,633



Yeah, the ICO actually said since I made my last post that I don't need to contact the companies again to tell them.

I'm also expecting that kind of response - and aware it won't be the fastest because of the influx of requests since 25th May, however I still want a copy of everything they hold on me, which I am still entitled to. Example, I have still never received a copy of the original PCN from 3 years, despite asking for it on more than 4 occasions!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 12 Jul 2018 - 10:40
Post #147


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,612
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



I would stop that response before you get it
You point out that while you expect the company may be dealing iwth an elevated number of enquiries since the GDPR was put in place, this would have been somethign they must have anticpated, as a part of their expected business dealing with personal data, and they had 2 years to put processes in place to deal with their legal obligations. If they do indeed claim a huge increase, you require the ICO to verify these claims, and then to investigate the operators failures to implement suitable processes to deal with this ENTIRELY forseeable consequence.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Thu, 12 Jul 2018 - 11:30
Post #148


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,855
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



Nice one
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 12 Jul 2018 - 11:51
Post #149


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,612
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



As my day job is auditor in IT, youd be surprised how often I get responses such as the above, and learn how to head off at the pass wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
alexsyl
post Mon, 30 Jul 2018 - 08:50
Post #150


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 113
Joined: 12 Apr 2016
Member No.: 83,633



Hello again.

So over the weekend I received the attached letter from BWL again, headed up "Letter of Claim".

They have still not responded to my Subject Access Request (complaint has already been made to the ICO who are investigating but as yet no response).

Not sure if I send another rebuke letter to BWL using the ICO as leverage again - or is this all just proof that they don't actually read any letters sent to them and just send tree-based harassment to everyone and its dog? Or do I just speak to the ICO again and push for an update on my complaint?

How do I play this? Starting to feel a bit out of my depth so any pointers appreciated?

Many thanks

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Mon, 30 Jul 2018 - 09:10
Post #151


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,137
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



You repeat again that you are still waiting for the SAR, you require all the documents that they intend to use in court in order to narrow the issues between you, as expected by the courts. You also want an explanation of how the £54 initial legal costs on page 1, which are not allowed by the small claims court, changes to £54 debt recovery costs in the second page.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
alexsyl
post Mon, 30 Jul 2018 - 09:46
Post #152


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 113
Joined: 12 Apr 2016
Member No.: 83,633



Thanks Ostell, will draft up a response shortly.

Is it worth me speaking to the ICO in the meantime and trying to get a follow up on my complaint, do you think?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Mon, 30 Jul 2018 - 09:54
Post #153


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,612
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Not sure you need to be told to do that - chasing up a complaint is fairly normal, especially with the ICO!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
alexsyl
post Mon, 30 Jul 2018 - 10:01
Post #154


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 113
Joined: 12 Apr 2016
Member No.: 83,633



No worries, first foray into dealing with them so not sure what to expect from them!

Will draft up a letter response to BWL shortly and post here for critique. Cheers
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
alexsyl
post Mon, 30 Jul 2018 - 11:31
Post #155


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 113
Joined: 12 Apr 2016
Member No.: 83,633



First draft below, any advice or critique appreciated?

Many thanks


I refer to your letter dated 24th July 2018.

Once again, I am left unsatisfied and frustrated at your lack of responses to my letters of 31st May and 29th June 2018, that have clearly stated my denial of any debt to yourselves and/or your client, Vehicle Control Services Ltd (VCS).

I also note your lack of any acknowledgement to my formal Subject Access Request (SAR) with yourselves; this is now the third time I have had to contact you regarding this. As you have failed to respond within one month of my initial request, a formal complaint in relation to your conduct has since been lodged with the Information Commissioners Office (ICO) as you are now in contravention of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

In addition, I demand a full explanation of how the £54 of “initial legal costs” as detailed on page 1 of your letter, which as you know are not permitted by the small claims court, changes to £54 of “debt recovery costs” on the second page?

Further to the points detailed above, I also require all the documents that you intend to use in court sent to me within 10 days of the date of this letter, in order for me to review in full and to narrow any issues, as expected by the courts.

I therefore await your full and complete response by 9th August 2018.

Yours faithfully,

XXXXXXXXX
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
alexsyl
post Tue, 31 Jul 2018 - 09:17
Post #156


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 113
Joined: 12 Apr 2016
Member No.: 83,633



Hi again, sorry to ask but wondering if anyone can sanity check the above letter draft before I post?

Feeling slightly out of my depth and you guys are all much better versed than I am!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Tue, 31 Jul 2018 - 09:35
Post #157


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,137
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



Send it
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Tue, 31 Jul 2018 - 09:50
Post #158


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,855
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



Looks OK to me

Do NOT add the heading "Without Prejudice"

If BWL issues a claim, you want to be able to show that letter to the Court
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
alexsyl
post Tue, 31 Jul 2018 - 14:33
Post #159


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 113
Joined: 12 Apr 2016
Member No.: 83,633



Thanks - I tend not to add that heading anyway, just in case.

Will send this afternoon and see what comes back.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Wed, 1 Aug 2018 - 14:01
Post #160


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,612
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Only add that heading if you know wht it does smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

9 Pages V  « < 6 7 8 9 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
4 User(s) are reading this topic (3 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
1 Members: alexsyl

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Thursday, 20th September 2018 - 11:47
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.