• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

Parking Fine - no reply to letter (parking eye)

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Parking Fine - no reply to letter (parking eye)

    Hello there,

    I am new to this forum.

    I posted the appeal letter from www.parkingcowboys.co.uk to Parking Eye, when I got the first parking notice. I have not hear anything from them until today, "letter before county court claim" (this letter was sent by first class, I know very bad mistake)

    On the letter it state they have 'sent me two other letters' which I have only received one (the first one).

    What do I do now?

    Background;

    Parking date: 03 November 2013
    Parked in: Ilford Retail Park
    Last edited by watwy; 30th December 2013, 20:00:PM. Reason: adding info

  • #2
    Re: Parking Fine - no reply to letter (parking eye)

    Can you post up the letter minus personal details ?

    Is the registered keeper the driver ?

    M1

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Parking Fine - no reply to letter (parking eye)

      Originally posted by mystery1 View Post
      Can you post up the letter minus personal details ?

      Is the registered keeper the driver ?

      M1
      Thank you for your reply.

      Please see letter attached.

      No, the registered keeper was not driving
      Attached Files

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Parking Fine - no reply to letter (parking eye)

        I note that it was sent from the "Parking Eye Legal Department".

        Does that imply that all their other departments are somehow illegal?

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Parking Fine - no reply to letter (parking eye)

          Originally posted by watwy View Post
          Thank you for your reply.

          Please see letter attached.

          No, the registered keeper was not driving

          Naughty naughty parking eye. They are claiming their LBA's are fully compliant in court documents and yours is nothing close to compliant !

          Anyhow, as with all letters before action, a robust response is required. The reference to the "fully compliant" comment can be found here .

          I suggest something like

          Dear Ms Ledson,

          I received your letter headed xxxxx on xxxx the contents of which are noted. It would appear that this is a letter before action although it is not compliant with the pre action protocols. Having seen a reply to defence you have sent another victim in which you claim to be "fully compliant" I am quite shocked. I can honestly say I thought a paid professional would know and respect the rules of their profession.

          The pre action protocols dictate that in a letter before action the claimant should set out the details of the matter in writing and a clear summary of the facts on which the claim is based.

          The claimant should also list the essential documents on which the claimant intends to rely and i would like copies of these please, set out the form of ADR (if any) that the claimant considers the most suitable and invite the defendant to agree to this and refer the defendant to the Practice Direction and in particular draw attention to paragraph 4 concerning the court's powers to impose sanctions for failure to comply with the Practice Direction.

          If financial loss is claimed, an explanation of how the amount has been calculated.

          Please take this response as an acknowledgement of your LBA to which a full response will be provided within 14 days of rectification of the flaws in your letter. I am taking advice from persons with experience in legal matters however that advice is limited until compliance with the above faults is achieved.

          Yours etc

          M1

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Parking Fine - no reply to letter (parking eye)

            One might have noticed that the private parking parasites are using the same argument of volenti - free choice - that the clamping cowboys formerly used.

            Comment

            View our Terms and Conditions

            LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

            If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


            If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.
            Working...
            X