DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 61037--------------------------------------------------
Re: NCP Birmingham City Centre. Judes Street. Broken Machine but
missed letter
By: b789 Date: March 6, 2025, 5:37 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Are you saying that the letter you have shown us is their
response to this letter:
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/ncp-birmingham-city-centre-judes-street-broken-machine-but-missed-letter/msg56325/#msg56325
If so, you should report them to the SRA
Send the following response to that letter:
[quote]Subject: Failure to Engage with Pre-Action Protocol
Requirements
Dear Sirs,
Re: Letter of Claim dated 20th January 2025
I acknowledge receipt of your generic response, which fails to
engage with my specific and reasonable requests for information
under the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (PAPDC). Your
failure to provide meaningful responses is both obstructive and
unreasonable.
For the avoidance of doubt, I require you to respond to my
questions in full and in writing. Directing me to generic FAQs
or a payment portal does not discharge your obligations under
the PAPDC. I will remind you that paragraph 3.1 of the PAPDC
requires you to provide “a summary of the facts” and “an
explanation of how the amount has been calculated.” Your failure
to do so will result in a costs sanction should this proceed to
litigation.
To be clear:
[indent[1. I require a direct answer regarding the additional
£70 charge: Is it a debt recovery fee, and if so, does it
include VAT?
2. I require clarity on whether the principal sum is being
pursued as damages for breach of contract or as consideration
for a parking contract.[/indent]
If you fail to respond adequately, I will raise this with the
court as a clear example of unreasonable conduct, and I reserve
the right to seek costs on this basis.
Yours faithfully,
[Your Name][/quote]
#Post#: 61047--------------------------------------------------
Re: NCP Birmingham City Centre. Judes Street. Broken Machine but
missed letter
By: Smartdriver Date: March 6, 2025, 6:36 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Yes indeed I sent the suggested reply word for word as advised
above. This is their response to that. The letter came today
in the post, I have had no email reply.
Should I now complain to SRA. If so, how, and on what grounds?
What about HMRC as suggested as above also?
Or best just to leave them to (hopefully) mess it up?
For now, should I just send your suggested response to their
generic email? And then wait for the claim to arrive?
#Post#: 62288--------------------------------------------------
Re: NCP Birmingham City Centre. Judes Street. Broken Machine but
missed letter
By: Smartdriver Date: March 13, 2025, 7:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
An email from Moorside Legal! They have not answered the
questions I asked, of course, but does this change anything?
''Our client: National Car Parks Limited
We write further to your recent email.
Our answers to your questions are as follows:
•
Charge of £70 is the amount set out in both the British Parking
Association and International Parking Community Codes of
Practice as the amount which may be added to a Parking Charge
when a Parking Charge remains unpaid and when further recovery
is required. Our Client adheres to the ATA’s Code of Practice.
The £70 does not represent the cost of recovery but is a
reasonable amount in relation to the Parking Charge amount, in
order to encourage early payment of the Parking Charge without
the need for debt recovery. It is a fair amount set by our
Client’s government-approved Accredited Trade Association Code
of Practice. There are however also costs incurred by our client
in relation to debt recovery services.
•
land, you agreed to enter into a contract with our client and to
be bound by the terms and conditions of that contract. The terms
and conditions were clearly displayed at the entrance and in
prominent places within the car park. Due to your failure to
comply with the terms and conditions, our client has issued the
PCN therefore if we are instructed to issue a claim the reason
would be for Unpaid parking charges/ breach of contract. ''
What now? Just wait for the claim form, I guess?
#Post#: 62294--------------------------------------------------
Re: NCP Birmingham City Centre. Judes Street. Broken Machine but
missed letter
By: b789 Date: March 13, 2025, 8:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Just mess wither incompetent little heads. Their refusal to
engage properly with the PAP means that you should also report
them to the SRA for failing to comply with professional
obligations, particularly around transparency and good practice
in litigation. This is especially relevant as they continue to
ignore your reasonable requests.
Send this response so that are on notice:
[quote]Subject: Final Demand for Compliance with Pre-Action
Protocol
Dear Sirs,
Re: Letter of Claim dated 20th January 2025
Your latest response is yet another example of your failure to
comply with the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (PAPDC). I
am giving you this final opportunity to correct your conduct
before I escalate matters further.
To be absolutely clear:
The £70 charge – You have still failed to confirm whether this
amount is inclusive of VAT. I am not interested in your tired
regurgitation of ATA Codes of Practice, which hold no legal
weight. Answer the question: is this sum inclusive of VAT? If it
is, explain why your client is passing its VAT liability onto an
alleged debtor. If it is not, confirm whether VAT has been
accounted for in accordance with HMRC guidelines.
The nature of the principal sum – Your vague response is
entirely inadequate. I asked you a simple question: is the PCN
being pursued as damages for breach of contract or as a core
contractual charge? This is a fundamental distinction in law.
Your deliberate refusal to provide a direct answer is noted and
will be brought to the court’s attention should you be foolish
enough to issue a claim.
Your repeated refusal to comply with PAPDC amounts to
unreasonable conduct and will be met with an appropriate
response should this matter proceed. This includes but is not
limited to:
- A formal costs application under CPR 27.14(2)(g) for your
client’s unreasonable pre-action conduct.
- A strike-out application should you persist in issuing a claim
without first complying with the PAPDC.
- Further action regarding your clear failure to provide
material information required under professional conduct rules.
You have seven days to provide proper answers. If you continue
to ignore your obligations, I will highlight your embarrassing
incompetence before the court and ensure your client is held to
account for your failings.
No further warnings will be given.
Yours faithfully,
[Your Name][/quote]
#Post#: 65913--------------------------------------------------
Re: NCP Birmingham City Centre. Judes Street. Broken Machine but
missed letter
By: Smartdriver Date: April 7, 2025, 5:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Another letter, telling me once again - in writing - they are
unable to reply to me in writing.
Still no sign of a claim though. Any idea how long that might
take?
#Post#: 65945--------------------------------------------------
Re: NCP Birmingham City Centre. Judes Street. Broken Machine but
missed letter
By: b789 Date: April 7, 2025, 7:41 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Please don't paraphrase or simply say you have received a
petter/response. Show us exactly the wording used.
#Post#: 65959--------------------------------------------------
Re: NCP Birmingham City Centre. Judes Street. Broken Machine but
missed letter
By: Smartdriver Date: April 7, 2025, 8:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
It’s identical word for word to the letter from them I posted in
post 19, the only difference is the date. This one is dated 31
March. It appears to be just their standard postal generic fob
off response to any email. I can post a picture of it when I get
home but I’m not sure it adds anything as you have it already
above. Last time I did get an email response as well a couple of
weeks later which was marginally more individual so we will see
if they do the same this time.
#Post#: 65963--------------------------------------------------
Re: NCP Birmingham City Centre. Judes Street. Broken Machine but
missed letter
By: b789 Date: April 7, 2025, 9:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
So, send then the same response with the dates adjusted.
Have you reported them to the SRA yet?
#Post#: 111418--------------------------------------------------
Re: NCP Birmingham City Centre. Judes Street. Broken Machine but
missed letter
By: Smartdriver Date: February 27, 2026, 1:26 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Well after a year, the claim has arrived.
Can you advise on what to do now? Presumably the merits of
their claim haven’t got stronger in the last 12 months.
HTML https://imgbox.com/EZJFmicu
#Post#: 111524--------------------------------------------------
Re: NCP Birmingham City Centre. Judes Street. Broken Machine but
missed letter
By: Smartdriver Date: February 28, 2026, 8:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Can I just check I don’t know if people can still see the
documents I listed last year as Imgur is blocked in the UK now.
Let me know if I need to post anything again
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page