Help required please - Letter Before Claim - Excel Parking

[HugosAngel]

Hi there, your help would be greatly appreciated.

A "parking charge notice" was issued to my vehicle. The reason was that the driver left the site of a retail park. The driver did not leave the site but has no proof (eg a receipt of purchase). The Notice to keeper was issued 7 days later.

An appeal to the parking company and IAS failed. Debt collection company letters were ignored and I have recently received a Letter Before Claim.

The PCN did not comply with PoFA rules and the parking company has denied that it is a PCN yet the Letter Before Claim (from the parking company) states that it is to recover the sum of £XXX.XX in respect of a parking charge notice issued to the vehicle bearing the registration mark XXXX XXX on (the date of the incident).

The debt collection company also refers to the PCN and parking charge date as being the date that the card was issued to my vehicle and not the date of the issue of the notice to keeper. Aren't they both acknowledging that the non-PoFA-compliant PCN was indeed a notice to driver thus breaking the rules of PoFA? The parking company has also made me aware in their correspondence that they will be relying on the keeper liability provisions of Schedule 4 of the PoFA and that as such I remain liable for the outstanding parking charge notice.

There have been other issues such as threatening letters from the debt collection company saying that if their "client takes court action and wins, they may ask the court to order you to pay their court fees and solicitor's costs - as well as the parking charge. A Court Judgment against you could seriously affect your future creditworthiness and employability". They made no mention of the fact that this wouldn't happen if I lost and the money was paid within 30 days. The parking company has also stated that because the IAS rejected my appeal a judge is likely to do the same and I would lose. They then urge me to pay up.

The parking company has also changed some of the detail of thire claim based on information I submitted in my appeal.

I'm sorry this post is a bit long-winded. Apart from ticking box D "I dispute the debt" and requesting documents from the company is there anything else I could do? Is it worth mentioning the above in my reply to the Letter Before Claim?

Thank you in anticipation ...

[Kati]

tagging charitynjw ostell for advice xx

[Laticsforlife]

It took me while to understand the offence, but for anyone else answering this conundrum, what they are saying is they parked in a retail park and then walked off to shop/work/whatever, elsewhere, leaving the car parked for free.

What evidence do they have of this? It's not something I've seen before, was the car parked over the allowed time also?

[HugosAngel]

Hello LATICSFORLIFE,

Sorry if this case is a bit confusing. Yes, the parking company is stating that the driver parked the car and walked off the premises. The parking was free for four hours. The car was parked for approximately 40-50 minutes. I don't know what evidence the company will rely on if this matter proceeds to Court. They do, however, say that a signed statement from the parking attendant will be deemed as evidence in Court.

Thank you

[HugosAngel]

... I should add that the car park is for customers only. The driver was a customer, made a small purchase but hasn't got the receipt.

[Laticsforlife]

The witness must be willing to stand up and say he saw the driver walk off, which is of course a lie. He cannot rely on a witness statement, he must be there for cross-examination.

[HugosAngel]

Thank you, LATICSFORLIFE.

[jaguarsuk]

The witness must be willing to stand up and say he saw the driver walk off, which is of course a lie. He cannot rely on a witness statement, he must be there for cross-examination.

How was the purchase made, by card or cash?

If the purchase was made by card their is an audit trail and this could be an avenue to disproving any witness statement. Wait until charitynjw and ostell have come by, they know plenty about parking and their advice will be worth heeding.

[HugosAngel]

It was a small purchase, paid for in cash.

[jaguarsuk]

It was a small purchase, paid for in cash.

That's a shame. Hopefully there is another way around this, but if need be the Data Protection Act 1998 SAR does allow you to request CCTV footage from anywhere you are captured, which would be conclusive proof the driver was in the shop of course. However, that would mean identifying the driver and is a last resort.

As I said, see what others say.

[HugosAngel]

tagging charitynjw ostell for advice xx

Thank you Kati, I could really do with some advice.

[ostell]

So lets have copies of all the documents, suitably redacted, leaving the dates. And copies of your appeal. Host them on a file sharing site and link to them.

Search the VCS v Ibbotson case, where VCS tried the same trick and got hammered in court.

The IAS are not independent and will reject any appeal, they are run by the same people that run the IPC and Gladstones solicitors.

The parking companies often ignore appeals stating that they have failed to comply with POFA, selective eyesight.

[HugosAngel]

So lets have copies of all the documents, suitably redacted, leaving the dates. And copies of your appeal. Host them on a file sharing site and link to them.

Search the VCS v Ibbotson case, where VCS tried the same trick and got hammered in court.

The IAS are not independent and will reject any appeal, they are run by the same people that run the IPC and Gladstones solicitors.

The parking companies often ignore appeals stating that they have failed to comply with POFA, selective eyesight.

Thank you OSTELL for the information. I'm working on the documents now. Do you need all of the debt collection letters as well?

[HugosAngel]

So lets have copies of all the documents, suitably redacted, leaving the dates. And copies of your appeal. Host them on a file sharing site and link to them.

Search the VCS v Ibbotson case, where VCS tried the same trick and got hammered in court.

The IAS are not independent and will reject any appeal, they are run by the same people that run the IPC and Gladstones solicitors.

The parking companies often ignore appeals stating that they have failed to comply with POFA, selective eyesight.

I've got everything prepared and have opened a file sharing site account. Just waiting for a confirmation email before I can use the site. In the meantime I will read the VCS v Ibbotson case.

Thanks again.

[HugosAngel]

So lets have copies of all the documents, suitably redacted, leaving the dates. And copies of your appeal. Host them on a file sharing site and link to them.

Search the VCS v Ibbotson case, where VCS tried the same trick and got hammered in court.

The IAS are not independent and will reject any appeal, they are run by the same people that run the IPC and Gladstones solicitors.

The parking companies often ignore appeals stating that they have failed to comply with POFA, selective eyesight.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/unrky9fje...nSdWNidoa?dl=0

Hi ostell , I have now uploaded the correspondence. Please see the link above. There's quite a bit, I'm afraid. There are also 3 letters from Debt Recovery Plus and 2 from Zenith Collections dated from between 11 September and 18 October 2017.. I haven't included them but will do so if you require them. They are basically asking me to pay the charge and state that if I don't pay they will recommend that their client takes legal action. They say that if this goes to court and the parking company wins a CCJ will be issued which may affect my "creditworthiness and employability". (They don't mention that this will only happen if a CCJ is issued and I don't pay.) Also I've submitted a few of the parking attendant's photos. The rest are more pictures of the vehicle.

I'm particularly concerned about the following statements in the operator's prima facie case and the IAS adjudicator's dismissal:

The operator reported in its prima facie case that "appellant was the driver" and "appellant was the keeper". In paragraphs 10 and 11 they say that "the appellant states they did not leave the site". Paragraph 15 says "the appellant became liable for the parking charge notice ... by parking their vehicle and walking off site". I have never stated that "I" did not leave the site. I have always referred to the driver.

Text in the adjudicator's dismissal reads "the Appellant had the option to go elsewhere to park if they felt that the terms and conditions were excessive or unreasonable. In view of the fact that the Appellant chose to park there it confirms that the Appellant agreed to park in accordance with the clearly displayed terms and conditions". Again this implies that I had appealed as the driver which I did not. I have never identified the driver, as pointed out in paragraph 7 of the operator's prima facie case - "He failed to confirm to Excel Parking Services Ltd who the driver of the vehicle was ..." and in the IAS adjudicator's dismissal - " The Appellant claims the driver did not leave the site, but as the driver is not identified I cannot give any weight to this claim."

Thank you again for offering to look into this for me.