Parking Charge Limited/BW Legal Court Claim, County court claim from the claimant in Private car park |
Parking Charge Limited/BW Legal Court Claim, County court claim from the claimant in Private car park |
Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 15:48
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 12 Joined: 19 Jul 2018 Member No.: 98,982 |
I have received a 2 court claims of the same date contravention date back in September 2017. I was the registered keeper of the vehicle but was not the driver at the time of both contravention. I have not seen any PCN or evidence of the driver. Recently, I have receive letters 2 claim forms from county court business centre, Northampton, the claimant is Parking Charge Ltd and their legal representatives BW legal,
Each form states, Amount claimed of 171.56 Including statutory interest of 11.56 from the date of contravention (29/09/2017 to 14/072018) Court fee of 25.00 Legal Representatives costs of 50. Total amount 246.56 Total amount of both claims 493.12 I need to create my defence for the claims, looking for advice. Other info, the parking companies privacy - https://www.pcnpay.co.uk/wp-content/uploads.../PCLPrivacy.pdf The private lands info on parking - http://www.rslonline.co.uk/parking/ I no longer own the car in question. This post has been edited by CR7: Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 17:28 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 15:48
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 16:03
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17,088 Joined: 8 Mar 2013 Member No.: 60,457 |
Ignoring is not the best of things to do.
They are allowed to chase the keeper if they do not know the identity of the driver. This is laid down in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Stating that you weren't the driver, even if you have evidence of that, is not sufficient. The first thing to do is acknowledge the claim using the details and password on the court form. Do not put anything in the defence. This will give you 33 days from the date of issue to send a defence to the court. You have not exactly given any information to try and help with a defence. The reasons for the claim, ie the Notice to Keeper/PCN that you received. I'm unclear if this is two claims for one event or two claims for 2 events. If you haven't got the documents write to BWLegal and request copies of all the documents that they are intending to rely on in court. You might get something. This post has been edited by ostell: Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 16:12 |
|
|
Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 16:59
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 12 Joined: 19 Jul 2018 Member No.: 98,982 |
Ignoring is not the best of things to do. They are allowed to chase the keeper if they do not know the identity of the driver. This is laid down in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Stating that you weren't the driver, even if you have evidence of that, is not sufficient. The first thing to do is acknowledge the claim using the details and password on the court form. Do not put anything in the defence. This will give you 33 days from the date of issue to send a defence to the court. You have not exactly given any information to try and help with a defence. The reasons for the claim, ie the Notice to Keeper/PCN that you received. I'm unclear if this is two claims for one event or two claims for 2 events. If you haven't got the documents write to BWLegal and request copies of all the documents that they are intending to rely on in court. You might get something. 2 Claims for two events on the same day. I have contacted BW Legal and they stated that they can not provide any evidence and that I have to request for evidence in the claim form This post has been edited by CR7: Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 17:09 |
|
|
Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 17:26
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 12 Joined: 19 Jul 2018 Member No.: 98,982 |
Ignoring is not the best of things to do. They are allowed to chase the keeper if they do not know the identity of the driver. This is laid down in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Stating that you weren't the driver, even if you have evidence of that, is not sufficient. The first thing to do is acknowledge the claim using the details and password on the court form. Do not put anything in the defence. This will give you 33 days from the date of issue to send a defence to the court. You have not exactly given any information to try and help with a defence. The reasons for the claim, ie the Notice to Keeper/PCN that you received. I'm unclear if this is two claims for one event or two claims for 2 events. If you haven't got the documents write to BWLegal and request copies of all the documents that they are intending to rely on in court. You might get something. Also the car park did not have management for as long as I can remember since the sports centre opened in 1972. Turns out this management is new, which started operating in early 2017. There isn’t any ticket machines on the site and no daily payments can be made at reception, the signage onsite does not state this, this information I have found on the sports centres website under frequently asked questions on the car parks page... |
|
|
Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 17:31
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 6,898 Joined: 15 Dec 2007 From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town. Member No.: 16,066 |
I have contacted BW Legal and they stated that they can not provide any evidence and that I have to request for evidence in the claim form Include that in your defence as unreasonable behaviour. You are trying to narrow the issues in order to save time at court, or even avoid court. They are not co-operating. Someone will give you chapter and verse on this. -------------------- Cabbyman 11 PPCs 0
|
|
|
Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 17:34
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 12 Joined: 19 Jul 2018 Member No.: 98,982 |
To add, the car park is operated with ANPR cameras. The car had numerous drivers and I can not identify whom that may had been, and I do not believe the claimant can either.
|
|
|
Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 17:34
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,126 Joined: 31 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,238 |
That's probably because BWL has never seen any of the documents and only inspects them if a claim is defended
It probably also doesn't know that the two claims are identical State in your defences that : The Particulars of Claim do not disclose any cause of action You have never received a PCN and have no idea what the claim is about Parking Charge Ltd has never had any right to recover payment from you as the registered keeper The Claimant's solicitor has refused your request for a copy of the Parking Notice The Claimant has issued two identical claims with duplicated Legal Representative fees You request that the court strikes out the claim for failure to disclose cause of action or orders Claimant to provide further and better particulars and the parking notices You request that the court orders that the two cases are combined For good measure, report the BWL refusal to the Solicitors Regulatory Authority |
|
|
Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 17:38
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 12 Joined: 19 Jul 2018 Member No.: 98,982 |
That's probably because BWL has never seen any of the documents and only inspects them if a claim is defended It probably also doesn't know that the two claims are identical State in your defences that : The Particulars of Claim do not disclose any cause of action You have never received a PCN and have no idea what the claim is about Parking Charge Ltd has never had any right to recover payment from you as the registered keeper The Claimant's solicitor has refused your request for a copy of the Parking Notice The Claimant has issued two identical claims with duplicated Legal Representative fees You request that the court strikes out the claim for failure to disclose cause of action or orders Claimant to provide further and better particulars and the parking notices You request that the court orders that the two cases are combined For good measure, report the BWL refusal to the Solicitors Regulatory Authority Thank you for the points you've made, however I would just like to correct the confusion, the claims are not duplicate but two different claims just on the same day. (2 x Entry and exits ) |
|
|
Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 17:44
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 6,898 Joined: 15 Dec 2007 From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town. Member No.: 16,066 |
How different are the two claims?
-------------------- Cabbyman 11 PPCs 0
|
|
|
Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 17:48
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 12 Joined: 19 Jul 2018 Member No.: 98,982 |
How different are the two claims? Not much really, on the claim form the only difference is the reference number, claim no and passwords. Same date, same amount. BWlegal did inform me that this is 2 different claims not a duplicate. This post has been edited by CR7: Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 17:50 |
|
|
Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 17:49
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,126 Joined: 31 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,238 |
two nearly identical claims
The point is that Parking Charge should have issued a single claim with a single £50 Legal Representative fee Using the same argument, there should not be two sets of debt collection charges (neither of which you believe they've paid) Part of your defence as keeper is that, even if they had been paid and PCL had met the conditions of POFA, the charges are none of your concern POFA only allows the amount of the original parking notice to be recovered Thought : Contact the DVLA immediately and ask how many times Parking Charge Ltd applied for your details For POFA to kick into play, they must apply for your details for every individual Parking Notice even if they were only a few hours apart If they only applied for them once, the claim for the later Parking Notice must automatically fail This post has been edited by Redivi: Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 17:52 |
|
|
Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 18:23
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 12 Joined: 19 Jul 2018 Member No.: 98,982 |
I am thinking about emailing PCL to see if they have any photographic evidence of the driver just to be sure. It will be along the lines of...
To whom it may concern, I have receive claim forms from the county court business centre. You’ve claimed against me on two occasions, I am assuming as there is 2 forms with different reference number and your legal representatives have informed me that they are not duplicates. I would like to state that I have not seen or received any PCN or anything to notify me of these charges until this court claims. As your legal to representatives have fail to co operate in sharing documents or evidence, will you be willing to share the evidence you have on the driver? Should I go ahead with this? Or is it a bad idea? two nearly identical claims The point is that Parking Charge should have issued a single claim with a single £50 Legal Representative fee Using the same argument, there should not be two sets of debt collection charges (neither of which you believe they've paid) Part of your defence as keeper is that, even if they had been paid and PCL had met the conditions of POFA, the charges are none of your concern POFA only allows the amount of the original parking notice to be recovered Thought : Contact the DVLA immediately and ask how many times Parking Charge Ltd applied for your details For POFA to kick into play, they must apply for your details for every individual Parking Notice even if they were only a few hours apart If they only applied for them once, the claim for the later Parking Notice must automatically fail Brilliant, If this is the case you have help me cut out half of the issue, thank you very much! This post has been edited by CR7: Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 18:22 |
|
|
Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 18:36
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 6,898 Joined: 15 Dec 2007 From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town. Member No.: 16,066 |
I am thinking about emailing PCL to see if they have any photographic evidence of the driver just to be sure. NO! If they provide evidence of the driver, that's an important plank of your defence gone up in smoke! -------------------- Cabbyman 11 PPCs 0
|
|
|
Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 18:58
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,126 Joined: 31 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,238 |
You have nothing to gain from asking for the pictures
Once legal action has started against the keeper, it's too late to provide the name of the driver At best the pictures will confirm your statement that you weren't the driver Not necessary because your statement is evidence At worst they will show that you were the driver and wreck your defence There is the other point that, when a solicitor has been engaged, all correspondence must be through that solicitor BWL has refused to provide the evidence you wanted Leave the situation so you can state the fact in your defence rather than provide the opportunity for Parking Charge Ltd to correct its solicitor's failure This post has been edited by Redivi: Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 20:15 |
|
|
Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 19:14
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 12 Joined: 19 Jul 2018 Member No.: 98,982 |
I am thinking about emailing PCL to see if they have any photographic evidence of the driver just to be sure. NO! If they provide evidence of the driver, that's an important plank of your defence gone up in smoke! Right. Just out curiosity, so say in this made-up scenario. If the defendant( registered keeper ) denies being the driver in their defence and the claimant brought forward evidence to the judge that the keeper was indeed the driver would this backfire on the defendant? Is it not better for the defendant to be cautious and see if they claimant actually has that evidence of the driver before the defendant writes that in their defence. Sorry if this sounds silly, I'm a teenager this is first time I've experienced this issue, I really have no idea how court works. - P You have nothing to gain from asking for the pictures Once legal action has started against the keeper, it's too late to provide the name of the driver At best the pictures will confirm your statement that you weren't the driver Not necessary because you're statement is evidence At worst they will show that you were the driver and wreck your defence There is the other point that, when a solicitor has been engaged, all correspondence must be through that solicitor BWL has refused to provide the evidence you wanted Leave the situation so you can state the fact in your defence rather than provide the opportunity for Parking Charge Ltd to correct its solicitor's failure Understood, thank you. |
|
|
Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 19:14
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,506 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
Have they substantively complied with PoFA? If so all this chat of the driver is irrelevant.
This post has been edited by Jlc: Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 19:15 -------------------- RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information, SAR=Subject Access Request Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it. |
|
|
Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 19:20
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 6,898 Joined: 15 Dec 2007 From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town. Member No.: 16,066 |
No one is telling you to deny being the driver. NEVER LIE. We are telling you not to identify the driver and speak only as RK. By the same token, we don't want you to answer the question of who was driving either. It is irrelevant when defending as RK until the judge asks who was driving.
In order to hold the RK liable, the PPC must turn triple backward somersaults through burning hoops. It's up to them to prove their case, on the balance of probabilities, not up to you to tell them where they are going wrong. Search for other recent (2018) BWL threads and try to understand what's going on with them. You will need to have a good understanding on the process and legal issues involved. Although maybe a little nerve-wracking for a first timer, it's very interesting what you learn. This post has been edited by cabbyman: Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 19:21 -------------------- Cabbyman 11 PPCs 0
|
|
|
Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 22:30
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 12 Joined: 19 Jul 2018 Member No.: 98,982 |
Thanks for all your help! I am now putting together my defence, here's a look at it so far, please feel open to comment on it
I, the defendant, deny that the claimant is entitled to relief claimed in the sum of £246.56, or at all, for the following reasons: (1) I state that I was the registered keeper of the vehicle at the time of the contravention but I am unable to identify myself as the driver. (2) I have not received any Parking Charge Notices from Parking Charge Limited nor the demand they have made as stated in the Particular of Claim. (3) To add to not being able to identify the driver; Due to reason (2) I had not acknowledged the charge made against me until I had received the claim form on 19/07/2018. This and the time of over 9 months pass makes it impossible for me to trace back to whom out the numerous persons that has access to this vehicle was driving on that day. (4) I had contacted the claimant’s legal representative on the 20/07/2018 at around 17:45 to request all the documentations they are intending to rely on in the court of law. The agent refused co-operation and told me that I had to request that in my defence. I see this as unreasonable behaviour. (5) The claimants have issued two nearly identical claims of the same contravention date, rather than issuing one claim with the sum of both amount claimed and a single legal representative fee and court fee. The claimant has double the cost of court and has tried to charge that against me even though I am not liable for the cost as stated in the Protection of Freedom Act 2012 Schedule 4 – Page 138(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’ (6) The claimant has included in the amount claimed the cost as set out in the Terms and Conditions of £60. After inspecting the car park, reading the signs and terms and condition. I have noticed that the sign states that “Breach of any term and condition will result in the driver being liable for a parking charge of £100” Under that is the terms and condition which states that “Parking charges are to be paid within 28 days, a reduced amount payment of £60 will be accepted within 14 days.” The contract clearly states that the liable amount is £100 and the reduced charge amounts to £100-£60=£40. The claimant has tried to claim the amount of £160 (Not including the statutory interest) which is clearly excessive as to what is stated in the contract. If the claimant intended the Parking charge to be £160 and the 14-day reduced amount to be £100 then the sign/t&c is worded wrong and is misleading. (7) As stated in the particulars of claim, the defendant was allowed 28 days from the PCN date to pay. That allowance would’ve expired on the 27/10/2018, therefore, the claimant has waited 8 months and 20 days to issue a court claim, accumulating unnecessary statutory interested during that time. This post has been edited by CR7: Sat, 21 Jul 2018 - 05:46 |
|
|
Sat, 21 Jul 2018 - 00:38
Post
#19
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,126 Joined: 31 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,238 |
Have you acknowledged service for both claims yet ?
You must do this to have the full 33 days to write your defences They need a lot of fleshing out |
|
|
Sat, 21 Jul 2018 - 04:56
Post
#20
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 12 Joined: 19 Jul 2018 Member No.: 98,982 |
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 18:51 |