BW Legal County Court Letter

[annastasia]

I have today received a CC letter on behalf of BW Legal, this is regarding a parking in an Excel carpark back in March 2012, When I originally received a PCN from excel 4 weeks after the actual dat of parking, I disputed their claim as I know I had paid the car park fee and as I had a witness with me on the day. I also asked them to send me proof that I had not paid the fee as the only proof they sent me was a photo of my car
entering the carpark. I received a reply stating they declined my appeal and that they would not communicate with me again! Therefore after checking online I ignored all other mail from them. A couple of years later I received a letter from BW Legal stating that they now owned the debt, again I have ignored all their letters until today.

I know I need to respond to a county court letter but not sure how to do this. any advice would be appreciated I have never had a parking ticket before or since as I know I always make sure I pay all carpark charges.

[Amethyst]

Re: BW Legal County Court Letter

How did you pay the car park charge at the time ? and did you hang on to a copy of your dispute you sent to them?

You will need to acknowledge the claim first of all - so get that done - should be able to do it online on moneyclaim - should be instructions bottom right of the N1 form, you want to acknowledge with intent to defend in full for now.. Also if you can type out the full 'particulars of claim' from the form that would be useful.

[ostell]

Re: BW Legal County Court Letter

BW Legal seem to be going for all the case that will soon be statute barred, there's many on PePiPoo at the moment and one where the claim issued date is 5 days after the statute barred date.

They can only claim from the driver of the car at the time. The legislation that allowed them to claim from the keeper had not been enacted at that time. In any of the documents back and forth (you still have them?) has the identity of the driver been revealed ? Simple yes or no.

How can you be expected to remember the driver after all this time?

[annastasia]

Re: BW Legal County Court Letter

Many thanks for your quick response


I think i would I paid at the machine in cash as I seem to remember asking the person with me at the time for change. I cant quite remember but I think it may have been a machine that you put your car reg into. I seem to remember asking them for proof that I had not paid as I never disputed that I was in the carpark at the time, but did dispute that I had not paid the fee. They sent me a photo showing my vehicle reg plate but noting to prove i had not purchased a ticket.

Their last letter refusing my appeal stated that they would no longer communicate with me and would take me to court this was back in 2012.

The Claimants Claim is for the Sum of £100 being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant in respect of a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) issued on 17/03/2012 (Issue Date) at 16.39 at The Square Chorlton-Cum-Hardy Anpr Charging Scheme Std (60-100)
The PCN relates to under registration ********.

The terms of the PCN allowed the Defendant 28 days from Issue Date to pay the PCN, but the defendant failed to do so.
Despite having being made the Defendant failed to settle their outstanding liability.

The claim also includes Statutory Interest pursuant to section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum a daily rate of 0.02 from 17/03/2012 to 03/01/2018 being an amount of £42.38.
The Claimant also claims £54.00 contractual costs pursuant to PCN Terms and Conditions.

[annastasia]

Re: BW Legal County Court Letter

Unfortunately I don't have any of the documents I do remember stating that I had been in the carpark that day and that I had purchased the ticket but asked them to send me proof that I had not paid the car park charge, as a photo of my vehicle reg plated only proved that I was in the car park. They never sent me any proof.

[annastasia]

Re: BW Legal County Court Letter

I have drafted this as a defence could you advise if it is ok or do I need to add more, never done one of these before


It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question.


However it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim on the following grounds:


1. The payment for parking was made in full on 17.03.2012 to Excel Parking via P & D
ticket machine.




2. No evidence has been provided to date that a valid ticket was not purchased on 17.03.12 or that it was displayed correctly in the vehicle windscreen. Despite requests to Excel Parking. A photograph of my vehicle registration plate entering/leaving the carpark does not provide proof that a ticket was not purchased or displayed in the windscreen.




3. As I did not receive the PNC until two weeks after 17.03.12 I was no longer in possession of the purchased ticket therefore I was not able to use that as evidence that I had purchased the carpark ticket and paid the correct amount to park for the duration of my stay.




4. No further evidence has been provided to support this despite several requests. Please find attached copy of an email sent to Excel Parking on 11.04.2012 requesting proof from Excel Parking that a ticket had not been purchased. All I received was a reply from Excel Parking stating they would no longer communicate with me.




If the Claimant had produced clear evidence that no ticket was purchased, then I would have paid the PNC as requested rather then risk a CCJ being issued against my name.




5. If the Claimant understood that the vehicle registration was mis_typed than ExcelParking Services Policy was not adhered to as outlined here by Excel:




“ We do recognise that motorist may input an incorrect digit(s) of their VR number when purchasing a P & D ticket and as such your processing allows for manual review/quality check of PNC’s before they are issued.”


6. This manual check either was not completed or incorrectly completed resulting in the erroneous PNC.




7. The manual check record has not been provide by the Claimant despite requested
by the defendant.




8 If the vehicle registration was mis-typed the claimant has accepted new terms. By accepting monies when the claimant knew, or could reasonably be expected to know, the registration entered did not belong to a car in the car park, the claimant has by its action accepted by performance a revised contract. This is the car park equivalent of the ‘battle of the forms” Butler Machine Tool Co Ltd v Ex-Cell-O Corporation (England) Ltd (1979) 1 WLR 401, Court of Appeal.




9. Since the parking fee was paid, there was no breach of contract and no loss was incurred by the claimant- there is no commercial justification for the amount claimed £271.38


10. The Protection of Freedoms Act does not permit the Claimant to recover a sum greater than the parking charge on the day before a Notice to Keeper was issued. The Claimant cannot recover additional charges. The Claimant claim a sum of £271.38 as the “amount claimed” (for which liability is denied) plus The Particulars of Claim include £50 that the Claimant has untruthfully presented as legal representative’s costs. The Claimant is well aware that CPR 27.14 does not permit such charges to be recovered in the Small Claims court. They are unjustified and should be struck out as unrecoverable.




To Summerise:

• Since the parking fee was paid, there was no breach of contract and no loss was incurred by the claimant - there is no commercial justification for the amount claimed £271.38
• The Claimant is not the landholder and therefore not in a position to issue this charge.
• The Protection of Freedom Act does not permit the Claimant to recover such an inflated amount.

Many thanks for your help