PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Second LBC after SAR, 14 days to pay inc Xmas hols days
Flakiesmum
post Thu, 20 Dec 2018 - 09:33
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 23 Mar 2016
Member No.: 83,201



Was posting on MSe site and have moved across as it’s gone v quiet there.
Staying on here now and would appreciate help
Am struggling a bit with correct way fonward at this stage. And should I use POFA or anything for rebuttal at this stage? Also going overseas until early Feb and worried this will progress whilst away. Hence my needy approach for answers and moving thread (apologies)
CIRCs are

5/12/17 - Car was parked in 4hrs free, private pay and display car park. Have the flimsy ticket no glue, covering the time the charge was issued, which states 'Fix ticket inside window" (there are contradicting signs in this car park including PAY and display, no parking private car park)
5/12/17 - Windscreen charge 'Not displaying a valid permit'
22/12 - The keeper of the vehicle sent written appeal providing evidence that the photo taken by UKPCM clearly shows matching serial no of 'flipped' ticket on dashboard. Driver has never been disclosed.
25/1/18 - Appeal denied letter from UKCPM. No information given on Contracted party, what the charge was based on etc.
8/2/18 - Formal demand letter from UKCPM (NOT A NTK) (68 days after pcn)
15/5/18 - Threat letter No.1 from DRP
29/5/18 - Threat letter No.2 from DRP
12/6/18 - Threat letter No.3 from DRP
12/7/18 GStones ' quoting Beavis' letter
14/11/18 GstonesLetter Before Claim
22/11/18 SAR request to UKCPM and cease processing letter to GStones
26/11 GStones letter refusing to place on hold followed up with second request to cease processing data
SAR data received from Parking co
12/ 12 and 13/ 12 Two further letters from GStones headed LBC. Both giving 14 days to pay. By 26th and 27th Dec Same reference, same incident. Both exactly the same content and enclosing a copy of their 14th Nov letter and instruction to pay gstones

DVLA have confirmed by email that they have not received any request for keeper details
UKCPM confirmed by email following up on the SAR as follows
“The PCNs on our system get automatically sent across to the DVLA, this information is then automatically uploaded on to our system. The DVLA will only send us correspondence if there is a Problem with the vehicle information that we have supplied to them. Therefore we have no correspondence from the DVAL regarding yourself or your vehicle”

Does the keeper respond at this stage? If so would really appreciate a steer on what basis please, and how detailed should the response be?
Am a bit confused as to correct way rebut now e.g flipped ticket non compliance with POFA, ( they are making an assumption on driver) PAP non compliance
Will not responding be seen as not be complying with “the PAP” ?

Many thanks

This post has been edited by Flakiesmum: Thu, 20 Dec 2018 - 09:40
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 32)
Advertisement
post Thu, 20 Dec 2018 - 09:33
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Tue, 12 Feb 2019 - 12:35
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 20,483
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



You send them the email frmo teh DVLA proving they have been lied to by their client. ALso state to them that, as a reuslt of the SAR, their clients records show that NO NTK WAS ISSUED. Without a NtK being served on you, the keeper, within the prescribed timescales, there can be no POFA liability.

Point out that
1) There is no presumption in law as to the identity of the driver
2) Their client is require to prove every eleemnt of their claim
3) IF they claim you are the driver, you will require they prove it, using evidence
4) THis evidence must already exist, and so under the PAP you REQUIRE them to forward you all evidence they have as to the identity of the driver, to narrow the topics under dispute. If they are silent or refuse, you will invite the court to draw the obvious conclusion.

State you require them to confirm cancellation of the notice within 14 days, as they have no realistic prospect of success at court. SHoudl they continue to perjure themselves, you will ensure the courts attention is drawn to this.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
chapinahat
post Tue, 12 Feb 2019 - 18:33
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 74
Joined: 9 Feb 2019
Member No.: 102,366



Hi

Only perjury if on witness statement or repeated in court under oath. Who has told you the lie is the starting point not that the PPC is intending to commit perjury. You can research fraud if wanting to act against a lie.Stick it on counterclaim.

ATB
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Flakiesmum
post Thu, 28 Mar 2019 - 11:32
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 23 Mar 2016
Member No.: 83,201



They won't give up!

I sent the letter to Gs as per the kind advice from nosferatu1001

Have now received a reply stating that their client has since confirmed that the keeper details were noted from the appeal off the back of the windscreen PCN.
Pay 160.00 or we will take further legal action.

The original appeal letter (to which they are referring) did not reveal the driver and included 'I do not give my consent to process data relating to me or this vehicle'

Is there any way to make this stop?

If I've read it correctly are they only allowed to pursue the keeper if they follow the POFA process and obtain information from the DVLA ? which they have now conceded that they did not.

Further expert guidance would be very much appreciated as usual
TIA

This post has been edited by Flakiesmum: Thu, 28 Mar 2019 - 11:32
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Flakiesmum
post Thu, 28 Mar 2019 - 17:07
Post #24


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 23 Mar 2016
Member No.: 83,201



I was clearly despondent at the receipt of Gs letter and have rallied myself with a re-read of POFA

Here is my suggested (yet another) reply to Gs

Thank you for your letter confirming that my keeper details were obtained by your client from the appeal letter.

By confirming this information it is an admission that your client has not complied with nor met the statutory conditions of Paragraph 11 of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act and there can be no POFA liability.

I will reiterate the points made in my previous letter
1) There is no presumption in law as to the identity of the driver
2) Your client is require to prove every element of their claim
3) IF they claim the keeper was the driver, I will require they prove it, using evidence.
4) I require you to forward all evidence as to the identity of the driver in accordance with the PAP
As you have not supplied such evidence, as it was previously requested in my letters of xx/xx and have admitted non compliance with POFA I once again request final cancellation of this notice within 14 days.


Any good ?

This post has been edited by Flakiesmum: Thu, 28 Mar 2019 - 17:09
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Flakiesmum
post Tue, 2 Apr 2019 - 12:58
Post #25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 23 Mar 2016
Member No.: 83,201



Would gratefully appreciate any expert second opinion on my latest draft reply to Gs please
Many many thanks
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Flakiesmum
post Tue, 9 Apr 2019 - 08:49
Post #26


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 23 Mar 2016
Member No.: 83,201



Need to send my reply in v soon. Still would appreciate any feedback on my suggested draft response.. TIA
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ManxRed
post Tue, 9 Apr 2019 - 09:23
Post #27


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,610
Joined: 20 Aug 2008
Member No.: 21,992



Looks OK to me. They will probably have twigged by now that their client has no case, but sadly they are well known for pushing on regardless in the forlorn hope that you'll fold. They'll get paid whatever the outcome.


--------------------
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
Flakiesmum
post Tue, 9 Apr 2019 - 14:53
Post #28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 23 Mar 2016
Member No.: 83,201



QUOTE (ManxRed @ Tue, 9 Apr 2019 - 10:23) *
Looks OK to me. They will probably have twigged by now that their client has no case, but sadly they are well known for pushing on regardless in the forlorn hope that you'll fold. They'll get paid whatever the outcome.


Many thanks ManxRed

Picked on the wrong one if they think I'll fold.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Flakiesmum
post Wed, 22 May 2019 - 20:24
Post #29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 23 Mar 2016
Member No.: 83,201



So as expected they are not giving up.

Have now received the attached
Which quotes “ A parking charge was applied to the windscreen... only the driver would have access to the parking notice”
Really?

“Off the back of the parking charge, you completed an appeal wherby you confirmed you were the keeper and we are now pursuing you as the driver and the keeper

lWe have previously confirmed no application to the DVLA has had to be made as you yourself completed and provided these details
This is untrue, ( and does not make grammatical sense) they previously “avered” that an application was made to the DVLA until I provided evidence from the DVLA proving there was no such application.

They are threatening that if driver details are not provided, under Schedule 4 of the POFA 2012 they “will hold you liable” and bring previous correspondence to the attention of the court.
Also enclosed is a copy of the “formal demand” and a set of photos from the original SAR including car and signage

Appreciate that more urgent assistance is needed for those with court cases. But would be grateful for any guidance on the best way to respond to this one, even though I guess it’s a waste of time as there is no reasoning with these fools.

TIA
http://a64.tinypic.com/314qlw0.jpg
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Wed, 22 May 2019 - 21:40
Post #30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,561
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



Now they're in trouble

It won't look good for Gladstones or UKCPM when your defence to a claim includes two examples of statements that you can prove to be untrue

1 You were told that there was an application to the DVLA. You can prove that there wasn't

2 Gladstones have now told you that there was no need to apply to the DVLA because you provided the details that allow them to recover from you under POFA
The first condition of POFA is that they must obtain the details from the DVLA

I wouldn't bother playing softball any more over this

What you could do instead is send them a formal complaint about their dishonest letter in breach of the Solicitors Code of Conduct
https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/handbook/code/history.page

This is required before you can complain to the SRA (Solicitors Regulatory Authority)

If you really want to go for the jugular, you could report them to the SRA directly for a breach of the Solicitor Principles
https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/sra-regula...page#principles

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Flakiesmum
post Thu, 23 May 2019 - 08:02
Post #31


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 23 Mar 2016
Member No.: 83,201



Thanks Redivi
Your advice gives me a confidence boost.
One formal compliant being drafted after swotting up on the Code of conduct. I’ve also just noticed another issue in the letter which tantamounts to breach of confidentiality so adding that to the list of breaches.
I’m taking this all the way to the SRA.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Flakiesmum
post Tue, 2 Jul 2019 - 08:10
Post #32


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 23 Mar 2016
Member No.: 83,201



It’s cancelled ! biggrin.gif biggrin.gif
After a letter of complaint, where all points were denied, they have reconsidered and the matter cancelled. For anyone interested in the points raised in the complaint and the responses a summary follows.....

I’d mainly like to say a massive THANK YOU for the help on this forum.

IN SUMMARY
Incorrectly addressed letters ....denied breach of GDPR as this was a typo

Dishonest information saying DVLA had been contacted ... denied “we accept our letters were factually inaccurate but this was a misinterpretation of information provided to us by our client”

Progressing a legal matter without merit I.e. Non compliance with POFA.... denied “we refer you to Schedule 4 para 4 (quoted) which means our client did not need to comply with Para 11 as you provided the keeper details in your appeal letter. As such para 11 is no longer applicable.

No notice to keeper ... this does not matter as we are relying on Elliot v Loake 1983 which held that the RK can be presumed to be the driver

Attempting to intimidate by sending a total of 6 letters before claim ( I cannot update the title of this thread but more letters came after I posted it) ....denied this was a systems issue and should have been clear as all letters had the same reference number and identical content.....

You couldn’t make it up .
I’m happy it’s gone a way but how on earth this mob can be considered lawyers is an absolute joke.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ManxRed
post Tue, 2 Jul 2019 - 09:36
Post #33


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,610
Joined: 20 Aug 2008
Member No.: 21,992



Brilliant.

I hope the author of that last letter (and the previous ones) hasn't smashed a window in the office with his hugely protruding nose!


--------------------
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

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: Sunday, 21st July 2019 - 14:16
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.