PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Private Parking on waste ground
newmodelarmytroo...
post Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 07:56
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 25 Jun 2018
Member No.: 98,596



Hi
Looking for advise re the following. 2 Years ago a relative parked their car (for which I am the legal owner), on what they thought was waste ground next to a private car park that shared the same entrance.

It turns out that rough waste ground they parked on was part of the tramac private car park. It was dark and unlit (so they never saw the signage saying pay at machne This was because it was dark and because at that time there had been flooded areas of the rough ground that caused them to concentrate on where they were going rather than look for signs. What signage there was just said "Pay at machine". At the time I went there and took photos when my relative told me after I received the PCN. I still have these.

I ignored the initial letters and I had not heard anything until saturday when I received a letter threatening court action.
This was a letter from the same solicitor as another poster on this forum acting for Traffic Control Services. The car park is or was Exel.
I have not responded in any way.

Any views what I should do? I am in scotland.

Could this company be having a "last blast" before deleting peoples data due to GDPR laws?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 07:56
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
kommando
post Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 08:02
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,163
Joined: 6 Oct 2012
Member No.: 57,558



In Scotland there is no keeper liability so they can only go after the driver, advice is to ignore but file all correspondence, only need to reply to a proper Letter before Action or actual claim.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
emanresu
post Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 08:18
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,017
Joined: 24 Aug 2007
From: Parking Support Groups
Member No.: 13,324



QUOTE
I am in scotland.


Was the car park in Scotland?


--------------------
Where there is a claim - there is a counterclaim.
Are Parking companies misusing your personal data or interfering with your lease? Counterclaims are only £25. Makes them sit up and take notice. For leaseholds, join in the Managing agents too. Since the purpose of these claims is to frighten you, give them something to be frightened of.
Subject Access Requests to the DVLA?Find out who accessed your data and when. Try SubjectAccess.Requests@dvla.gsi.gov.uk. [Apologies if it does not work]
Double Dip / ANPR FaultsThe BPA Report on ANPR Double Dips is here. Ideal case for a counterclaim (see above).
Daily Court List. See who is doing what and where here
Printing and posting Witness Statements. Easy and cheap way DoxDirect
What is court like. A District Judge's view
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
newmodelarmytroo...
post Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 08:46
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 25 Jun 2018
Member No.: 98,596



QUOTE (emanresu @ Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 09:18) *
QUOTE
I am in scotland.


Was the car park in Scotland?

Hi. Yes. It is in Scotland.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 09:05
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 39,903
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (newmodelarmytrooper @ Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 08:56) *
for which I am the legal owner

I'm not sure what bearing you think that has on anything at all given you are the only person involved in the case who knows that?

You are being chased as the registered keeper.

In Scotland there is no keeper liability (registered keeper and keeper being different anyway even though they may be the same person) the DPA 2018 (often referred to as GDPR) will have no effect in your case as its not unreasonable for them to assume the RK was driving at the time UNLESS they have been informed otherwise. It would be an interesting exercise to write and inform them categorically you were not driving and instruct them to cease processing data as there could be no liability, but unless you intend a battle with them and the ICO over this its not worth it.


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
newmodelarmytroo...
post Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 09:11
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 25 Jun 2018
Member No.: 98,596



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 10:05) *
QUOTE (newmodelarmytrooper @ Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 08:56) *
for which I am the legal owner

I'm not sure what bearing you think that has on anything at all given you are the only person involved in the case who knows that?

You are being chased as the registered keeper.

In Scotland there is no keeper liability (registered keeper and keeper being different anyway even though they may be the same person) the DPA 2018 (often referred to as GDPR) will have no effect in your case as its not unreasonable for them to assume the RK was driving at the time UNLESS they have been informed otherwise. It would be an interesting exercise to write and inform them categorically you were not driving and instruct them to cease processing data as there could be no liability, but unless you intend a battle with them and the ICO over this its not worth it.

Sorry when I said legal owner I meant registered keeper.
I was certainly not the driver. I have my own different car that I drive.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
newmodelarmytroo...
post Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 11:40
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 25 Jun 2018
Member No.: 98,596



QUOTE (kommando @ Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 09:02) *
In Scotland there is no keeper liability so they can only go after the driver, advice is to ignore but file all correspondence, only need to reply to a proper Letter before Action or actual claim.

Hi

Have attached a copy of the 1st page of letter.

Does that count as a letter I should reply to?

Thanks in advance.
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
whjohnson
post Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 11:45
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 423
Joined: 14 Feb 2015
Member No.: 75,738



So the car park signs named Excel as the parking company, yet you got a letter from VCS's solicitors.

Two different companies as far as the legal entity side of the law is concerned, so VCS cannot have an interest in the so-called debt and they know it.

Do not be confused into thinking that VCS and Excel are one and the same company - legally, they are registered as seperate companies at Companies House.

This post has been edited by whjohnson: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 11:47
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
newmodelarmytroo...
post Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 12:09
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 25 Jun 2018
Member No.: 98,596



QUOTE (whjohnson @ Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 12:45) *
So the car park signs named Excel as the parking company, yet you got a letter from VCS's solicitors.

Two different companies as far as the legal entity side of the law is concerned, so VCS cannot have an interest in the so-called debt and they know it.

Do not be confused into thinking that VCS and Excel are one and the same company - legally, they are registered as seperate companies at Companies House.

Thanks. So they are probably liable as far as gdpr is concerned?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
newmodelarmytroo...
post Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 12:24
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 25 Jun 2018
Member No.: 98,596



QUOTE (whjohnson @ Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 12:45) *
So the car park signs named Excel as the parking company, yet you got a letter from VCS's solicitors.

Two different companies as far as the legal entity side of the law is concerned, so VCS cannot have an interest in the so-called debt and they know it.

Do not be confused into thinking that VCS and Excel are one and the same company - legally, they are registered as seperate companies at Companies House.

Could vcs have been hired by excel? Would that make a difference?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Spudandros
post Tue, 26 Jun 2018 - 00:07
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 181
Joined: 7 Feb 2016
Member No.: 82,244



QUOTE (newmodelarmytrooper @ Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 13:09) *
QUOTE (whjohnson @ Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 12:45) *
So the car park signs named Excel as the parking company, yet you got a letter from VCS's solicitors.

Two different companies as far as the legal entity side of the law is concerned, so VCS cannot have an interest in the so-called debt and they know it.

Do not be confused into thinking that VCS and Excel are one and the same company - legally, they are registered as seperate companies at Companies House.

Thanks. So they are probably liable as far as gdpr is concerned?


No. First you need to tell them that you were not the driver and the should cease processing your data and remove it as they have no reasonable cause to retain it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
newmodelarmytroo...
post Tue, 26 Jun 2018 - 08:13
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 25 Jun 2018
Member No.: 98,596



QUOTE (Spudandros @ Tue, 26 Jun 2018 - 01:07) *
QUOTE (newmodelarmytrooper @ Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 13:09) *
QUOTE (whjohnson @ Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 12:45) *
So the car park signs named Excel as the parking company, yet you got a letter from VCS's solicitors.

Two different companies as far as the legal entity side of the law is concerned, so VCS cannot have an interest in the so-called debt and they know it.

Do not be confused into thinking that VCS and Excel are one and the same company - legally, they are registered as seperate companies at Companies House.

Thanks. So they are probably liable as far as gdpr is concerned?


No. First you need to tell them that you were not the driver and the should cease processing your data and remove it as they have no reasonable cause to retain it.

Thanks

So should I advise them of this or continue to ignore the letter?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Tue, 26 Jun 2018 - 09:54
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,021
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



Dear Sir

Without prejudice save to costs

Ref ****

I have received your letter dated *****

I have followed your advice to Google Dundee Parking Case regarding Ms Mackie

I suggest that in turn you Google :

1 Privity of contract regarding the legal capacity of your client when it is not the operator of the car park
2 Protection of Freedoms Act regarding its jurisdiction when the registered keeper was not the driver
3 Arkell v Pressdram Ltd regarding my intention to make any payment to your company

Yours Faithfully


This post has been edited by Redivi: Tue, 26 Jun 2018 - 09:59
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ManxRed
post Tue, 26 Jun 2018 - 10:08
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,264
Joined: 20 Aug 2008
Member No.: 21,992



QUOTE (Redivi @ Tue, 26 Jun 2018 - 10:54) *
Dear Sir

Without prejudice save to costs

Ref ****

I have received your letter dated *****

I have followed your advice to Google Dundee Parking Case regarding Ms Mackie

I suggest that in turn you Google :

1 Privity of contract regarding the legal capacity of your client when it is not the operator of the car park
2 Protection of Freedoms Act regarding its jurisdiction when the registered keeper was not the driver
3 Arkell v Pressdram Ltd regarding my intention to make any payment to your company

Yours Faithfully


laugh.gif

Excellent.


--------------------
Sometimes I use big words I don't understand in an effort to make myself sound more photosynthesis.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Spudandros
post Tue, 26 Jun 2018 - 15:55
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 181
Joined: 7 Feb 2016
Member No.: 82,244



QUOTE (newmodelarmytrooper @ Tue, 26 Jun 2018 - 09:13) *
QUOTE (Spudandros @ Tue, 26 Jun 2018 - 01:07) *
QUOTE (newmodelarmytrooper @ Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 13:09) *
QUOTE (whjohnson @ Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 12:45) *
So the car park signs named Excel as the parking company, yet you got a letter from VCS's solicitors.

Two different companies as far as the legal entity side of the law is concerned, so VCS cannot have an interest in the so-called debt and they know it.

Do not be confused into thinking that VCS and Excel are one and the same company - legally, they are registered as seperate companies at Companies House.

Thanks. So they are probably liable as far as gdpr is concerned?


No. First you need to tell them that you were not the driver and the should cease processing your data and remove it as they have no reasonable cause to retain it.

Thanks


So should I advise them of this or continue to ignore the letter?



Yes you should, as it throws a spanner in their works. But don't send the Arkell vs Pressdram reference :-D

Dear Sirs
I have no liability for this charge as I was not the driver and there is no keeper liability in Scotland. Do not write to me again as I will not respond. Please remove my details from your system as you have no reasonable cause to retain them.

Yours etc.

They'll likely send a pleading letter asking for you to name the driver, ignore everything else but retain all correspondence.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
newmodelarmytroo...
post Wed, 27 Jun 2018 - 12:28
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 25 Jun 2018
Member No.: 98,596



QUOTE (Spudandros @ Tue, 26 Jun 2018 - 16:55) *
QUOTE (newmodelarmytrooper @ Tue, 26 Jun 2018 - 09:13) *
QUOTE (Spudandros @ Tue, 26 Jun 2018 - 01:07) *
QUOTE (newmodelarmytrooper @ Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 13:09) *
QUOTE (whjohnson @ Mon, 25 Jun 2018 - 12:45) *
So the car park signs named Excel as the parking company, yet you got a letter from VCS's solicitors.

Two different companies as far as the legal entity side of the law is concerned, so VCS cannot have an interest in the so-called debt and they know it.

Do not be confused into thinking that VCS and Excel are one and the same company - legally, they are registered as seperate companies at Companies House.

Thanks. So they are probably liable as far as gdpr is concerned?


No. First you need to tell them that you were not the driver and the should cease processing your data and remove it as they have no reasonable cause to retain it.

Thanks


So should I advise them of this or continue to ignore the letter?



Yes you should, as it throws a spanner in their works. But don't send the Arkell vs Pressdram reference :-D

Dear Sirs
I have no liability for this charge as I was not the driver and there is no keeper liability in Scotland. Do not write to me again as I will not respond. Please remove my details from your system as you have no reasonable cause to retain them.

Yours etc.

They'll likely send a pleading letter asking for you to name the driver, ignore everything else but retain all correspondence.

Thanks for this. Will send today by registered delivery. So they cannot deny they got it.will let u know how it goes.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
emergencychimp
post Wed, 27 Jun 2018 - 12:44
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 228
Joined: 7 Sep 2013
Member No.: 65,032



DON'T SEND RECORDED. They will refuse it. Second first class with proof of postage.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
publicenemyno1
post Wed, 27 Jun 2018 - 12:44
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 116
Joined: 18 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,938



QUOTE
Thanks for this. Will send today by registered delivery. So they cannot deny they got it. will let u know how it goes.


I wouldn't waste your money, especially as 'signed for' can be wilfully refused. First class with a FREE proof of posting is fine.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Spudandros
post Wed, 27 Jun 2018 - 15:05
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 181
Joined: 7 Feb 2016
Member No.: 82,244



QUOTE (publicenemyno1 @ Wed, 27 Jun 2018 - 13:44) *
QUOTE
Thanks for this. Will send today by registered delivery. So they cannot deny they got it. will let u know how it goes.


I wouldn't waste your money, especially as 'signed for' can be wilfully refused. First class with a FREE proof of posting is fine.


This is Scotland. Unlike England, proof of sending is not proof of receipt. Send it recorded. If they refuse it, it will be recorded as that by any court Scotland and considered unreasonable conduct.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
publicenemyno1
post Wed, 27 Jun 2018 - 16:04
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 116
Joined: 18 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,938



My take on this? I don't know about the above and did not notice this was Scotland.

However, this is a letter that you actually want CEL to read and in my dealings they are not all that stupid, just belligerent, and usually fold when specific 'killer' points are put in front of them.

Would hate for the OP to have their killer point ignored - and 6 months down the line, out of the blue, have to start this whole thing at a 'higher stakes' stage in proceedings.

This post has been edited by publicenemyno1: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 - 16:05
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Monday, 12th November 2018 - 23:24
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.