DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 78054--------------------------------------------------
Advice needed: Letter of claim by BWlegal for SMART Parking,
Oakland Quay, Canary Wharf, London
DIR By: lewishamguy
Date: June 24, 2025, 5:46 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello,
Please advise re next steps, I have summarised my case below:
------------
Alleged date of contravention: 22 Jan 2023|||
Reason for PCN: parking without authorisation|||
Company: Smart Parking, represented by BWLegal
------------
As advised in the forums, all correspondence on the alleged
contravention was disregarded until letter of claim was
received.------
When letter of claim was received, I asked for evidence in the
format suggested in FAQ - which was then supplied b[/left]y
BWlegal (please see attachment) in addition with another letter
stating all outstanding queries have been concluded (see
attachment)
-----------
What happens next? Is there anything I should do?
-----------
Please keep in mind that I have not disputed the claim nor have
I supplied any information re registered keeper or who was
driving (based on advice suggested in the forums) - absolutely
no information has been provided from my side, until the letter
of claim was sent
------------
Re the contravention, I went into the Oakland Quay near Canary
Wharf, London to drop a few items at a friends apartment- which
is borne by the arrival time of 17:27:35 and the departure time
of 17:38:25 in the PCN - the car was stationary during this time
and was occupied with passengers.
------------
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 78088--------------------------------------------------
Re: Advice needed: Letter of claim by BWlegal for SMART Parking,
Oakland Quay, Canary Wharf, London
DIR By: b789
Date: June 25, 2025, 5:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The PCN is not PoFA 2012 compliant as it was not "given" within
the "relevant period". Therefore, there is no Keeper liability.
As there is no legal obligation on the Keeper to identify the
driver to an unregulated private parking firm, or anyone else,
including the court, the burden of proof is on the claimant to
prove that the person they are pursuing is the liable party. The
only way they could do that, is if the defendant tells them that
they are the liable party. Why would you do that?
I suggest you now respond to the reply given by BW Legal with
the following:
--- Quote ---
> Dear Sirs,
>
> Your Letter Before Claim contains insufficient detail of the
claim and fails to provide copies of the evidence your client
places reliance upon. It is therefore in breach of the
Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims.
>
> I am the registered keeper of the vehicle. I am not obliged to
identify the driver and decline to do so. There is no legal
presumption in law that the keeper of a vehicle was its driver
on any given occasion. Your client cannot pursue me as driver,
as per VCS v Edward (2023) [H0KF6C9C].
>
> If your client is seeking to rely on Schedule 4 of the
Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) to hold me liable as
keeper, they are unable to do so. The Notice to Keeper (NtK) was
issued on Wednesday 8th February 2023, relating to an alleged
contravention on Sunday 22nd January 2023. According to
paragraph 9(5) of Schedule 4, the NtK must be “given” to the
keeper within 14 days. Paragraph 9(6) deems the date of “giving”
to be two working days after posting, which in this case would
be Friday 10th February 2023 — 19 days after the event. Your
client is therefore out of time to claim keeper liability under
PoFA.
>
> As such, your client cannot pursue me as either the driver or
the keeper. To issue a claim in these circumstances would
constitute an abuse of process, and I will defend it vigorously.
If proceedings are issued, I will also seek costs for
unreasonable conduct under CPR 27.14(2)(g).
>
> Furthermore, your letter fails to comply with the requirements
of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (paragraphs
3.1(a)-(d), 5.1 and 5.2), as well as the Practice Direction –
Pre-Action Conduct (paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c)). Accordingly, this
is a formal request under both instruments for the following
information/documents:
>
> [indent]1. An explanation of the cause of action
> 2. Whether you are pursuing me as driver or keeper
> 3. Whether you are relying on the provisions of Schedule 4 of
PoFA 2012
> 4. The details of the claim: how long the vehicle was parked,
how the amount claimed was calculated
> 5. If for contractual breach: the date of the alleged
agreement, the parties to it, and a copy of the alleged contract
> 6. Photographic evidence showing the vehicle parked in breach
of the alleged contract
> 7. If for trespass, provide details
> 8. A copy of the contract with the landowner authorising
enforcement, as required by the BPA/IPC Code of Practice
> 9. A site plan showing where signage is displayed
> 10. Photographs of the signage (showing size, font,
positioning, and height) as they were on the date of alleged
contravention
> 11. Full details of the original charge, and any interest or
additional costs
> 12. Clarification of the £70 ‘debt recovery’ fee: is this net
or inclusive of VAT? If the latter, why is the consumer being
charged the operator’s VAT?
> 13. For the £100 principal charge: is this pleaded as
consideration for parking or as damages? Please clarify.
>
> You are bound by the same obligations under the Practice
Direction and the Protocol as any other litigant. Until your
client complies and provides the necessary information, it would
be premature and improper to proceed. Should a claim be issued,
I will seek an immediate stay and an order compelling
compliance.
>
> I trust your client will take the appropriate hint.
>
> Yours faithfully, [Your Name]
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 91256--------------------------------------------------
Re: Advice needed: Letter of claim by BWlegal for SMART Parking,
Oakland Quay, Canary Wharf, London
DIR By: lewishamguy
Date: September 24, 2025, 6:45 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Got a letter from BW Legal noting that case has now been closed
at their end and to contact Smart Parking Ltd for further
queries.
Appreciate the help from this forum - thank you.
#Post#: 91257--------------------------------------------------
Re: Advice needed: Letter of claim by BWlegal for SMART Parking,
Oakland Quay, Canary Wharf, London
DIR By: lewishamguy
Date: September 24, 2025, 6:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: lewishamguy link ---
>
> Got a letter from BW Legal noting that case has now been
closed at their end and to contact Smart Parking Ltd for further
queries.
>
> Appreciate the help from this forum - thank you.
>
> p.s: i did send them the email as suggested above
>
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 91262--------------------------------------------------
Re: Advice needed: Letter of claim by BWlegal for SMART Parking,
Oakland Quay, Canary Wharf, London
DIR By: b789
Date: September 24, 2025, 7:06 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Please show us that letter. DO NOT redact any signatures or the
name of the person that signed it.
#Post#: 115719--------------------------------------------------
Re: Advice needed: Letter of claim by BWlegal for SMART Parking,
Oakland Quay, Canary Wharf, London
DIR By: lewishamguy
Date: April 13, 2026, 10:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: b789 link ---
>
> Please show us that letter. DO NOT redact any signatures or
the name of the person that signed it.
>
--- End Quote ---
apologies, just seeing this now.
This is the text of the email I received from BW Legal:
--||Start of Email||--
22 September 2025
Dear xxx,
Thank you for contacting us, please find our response below:
Good afternoon,
Thank you for your correspondence.
Please be advised that the case has been closed on our end and
should you have any further queries to please contact our client
Smart Parking Ltd.
Kind Regards
As the issue has been resolved, no further action is required
from you at this time.
If you would like to view the full contact history or submit a
new query, please log into our Customer Portal by clicking here.
 
Yours sincerely,
BW Legal
--||End of Email||--
I have also attached screenshot of the case from the BWlegal
portal: [img]
HTML https://imgpile.com/p/MYUDyDo
[/img]<br
/>
HTML https://imgpile.com/p/MYUDyDo
#Post#: 115733--------------------------------------------------
Letter of Claim from DCB Legal for Smart Parking, Oakland Quay,
Canary Wharf London (second LoC for same contravention)
DIR By: lewishamguy
Date: April 13, 2026, 12:47 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I have received a second Letter of Claim from DCB legal for
SMART parking for an alleged contravention that had taken place
on 22 Jan 2023.
Details here:
HTML https://imgpile.com/p/Z4AAYc8
---------------------------------------------------------
The previous Letter of Claim was from BW Legal, which, with the
help of this forum, was addressed and the case was closed.
Details here:
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/advice-needed-letter-of-claim-by-bwlegal-for-smart-parking-oakland-quay-canary-w/msg78054/#msg78054
---------------------------------------------------------
-
What should be the approach for this second Letter of Claim for
the same alleged contravention?
-
Is sending a second LoC a usual practice and shall I use the
same response as before for this as well?
Advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you
#Post#: 115813--------------------------------------------------
Re: Advice needed: Letter of claim by BWlegal for SMART Parking,
Oakland Quay, Canary Wharf, London
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: April 14, 2026, 4:34 am
---------------------------------------------------------
What a farce. I would reply along similar lines to your previous
response. As they're instructing a different law firm, who
presumably won't be aware of the case history, I'd be minded to
include an opening paragraph about this, pointing out that this
is the second Letter of Claim you have received in respect of
the same parking charge, the file previously having been closed
by BW Legal on Smart's instruction. I would ask as a preliminary
question why, having previously closed the case, Smart have
elected to proceed again despite no new information coming to
light.
Feel free to show us a draft first.
#Post#: 115836--------------------------------------------------
Re: Advice needed: Letter of claim by BWlegal for SMART Parking,
Oakland Quay, Canary Wharf, London
DIR By: lewishamguy
Date: April 14, 2026, 6:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: DWMB2 link ---
>
> What a farce. I would reply along similar lines to your
previous response. As they're instructing a different law firm,
who presumably won't be aware of the case history, I'd be minded
to include an opening paragraph about this, pointing out that
this is the second Letter of Claim you have received in respect
of the same parking charge, the file previously having been
closed by BW Legal on Smart's instruction. I would ask as a
preliminary question why, having previously closed the case,
Smart have elected to proceed again despite no new information
coming to light.
>
> Feel free to show us a draft first.
>
--- End Quote ---
Sure, this is what I have drafted:
---------------------------------------------------------
Dear Sirs,
I would like to bring to your attention that a Letter of Claim
for this alleged contravention was issued and the case
subsequently closed by BW Legal acting on SMART Parking's
instruction. With no new information coming to light, I would
like to understand why SMART parking has taken this course of
action of issuing another Letter of Claim through your firm.
-
Your Letter Before Claim contains insufficient detail of the
claim and fails to provide copies of the evidence your client
places reliance upon. It is therefore in breach of the
Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims.
I am the registered keeper of the vehicle. I am not obliged to
identify the driver and decline to do so. There is no legal
presumption in law that the keeper of a vehicle was its driver
on any given occasion. Your client cannot pursue me as driver,
as per VCS v Edward (2023) [H0KF6C9C].
-
If your client is seeking to rely on Schedule 4 of the
Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) to hold me liable as
keeper, they are unable to do so. The Notice to Keeper (NtK) was
issued on Wednesday 8th February 2023, relating to an alleged
contravention on Sunday 22nd January 2023. According to
paragraph 9(5) of Schedule 4, the NtK must be “given” to the
keeper within 14 days. Paragraph 9(6) deems the date of “giving”
to be two working days after posting, which in this case would
be Friday 10th February 2023 — 19 days after the event. Your
client is therefore out of time to claim keeper liability under
PoFA.
-
As such, your client cannot pursue me as either the driver or
the keeper. To issue a claim in these circumstances would
constitute an abuse of process, and I will defend it vigorously.
If proceedings are issued, I will also seek costs for
unreasonable conduct under CPR 27.14(2)(g).
-
Furthermore, your letter fails to comply with the requirements
of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (paragraphs
3.1(a)-(d), 5.1 and 5.2), as well as the Practice Direction –
Pre-Action Conduct (paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c)). Accordingly, this
is a formal request under both instruments for the following
information/documents:
1. An explanation of the cause of action
2. Whether you are pursuing me as driver or keeper
3. Whether you are relying on the provisions of Schedule 4 of
PoFA 2012
4. The details of the claim: how long the vehicle was parked,
how the amount claimed was calculated
5. If for contractual breach: the date of the alleged agreement,
the parties to it, and a copy of the alleged contract
6. Photographic evidence showing the vehicle parked in breach of
the alleged contract
7. If for trespass, provide details
8. A copy of the contract with the landowner authorising
enforcement, as required by the BPA/IPC Code of Practice
9. A site plan showing where signage is displayed
10. Photographs of the signage (showing size, font, positioning,
and height) as they were on the date of alleged contravention
11. Full details of the original charge, and any interest or
additional costs
12. Clarification of the £70 ‘debt recovery’ fee: is this net or
inclusive of VAT? If the latter, why is the consumer being
charged the operator’s VAT?
13. For the £100 principal charge: is this pleaded as
consideration for parking or as damages? Please clarify.
You are bound by the same obligations under the Practice
Direction and the Protocol as any other litigant. Until your
client complies and provides the necessary information, it would
be premature and improper to proceed. Should a claim be issued,
I will seek an immediate stay and an order compelling
compliance.
I trust your client will take the appropriate hint.
Yours faithfully, [Your Name]
---------------------------------------------------------
Please let me know if this is ok for me to send, thank you
#Post#: 120200--------------------------------------------------
Re: Advice needed: Letter of claim by BWlegal for SMART Parking,
Oakland Quay, Canary Wharf, London
DIR By: lewishamguy
Date: May 31, 2026, 11:07 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi
I have received a claim letter from HM Courts & Tribunals
Service for the alleged offence, details of the alleged offence
has been listed in this thread.
Court letter:
HTML https://imgpile.com/p/zTEne1x
The claim has been bought forward by DCB legal, details here:
HTML https://imgpile.com/p/VC7MhLP
Chronology of events
1. DCB Legal sends LoC re the alleged offence - 2 April 2026
(
HTML https://imgpile.com/p/Z4AAYc8),
also noted in my post before
this
2. My response to DCB legal through email, 16 April 2026
HTML https://imgpile.com/p/IodFkqJ
3. DCB email for personal details and my subsequent response to
DCB legal, 22 April 2026
HTML https://imgpile.com/p/1ZR2kGM
After I provided my personal details, I did not receive any
notification or letter from DCB legal re this claim or anything
that was raised in my email to them on 16 April 2026, the next
letter was the letter from the court.
Does the forum have any recommendations as to respond to the
letter from HM Courts & Tribunals Service and the claim bought
forward by DCB legal
Thanks
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 3
DIR Next Page