URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 78723--------------------------------------------------
       Alliance Parking PCN - Trevone Beach - Overstay
       By: Trousers37 Date: June 28, 2025, 4:41 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Seeking support in relation to the below matter.
       Last year keeper of vehicle received a PCN from Alliance Parking
       at Trevino beach. Parking was paid by non keeper of car and can
       be evidenced on bank statement. There was a delay returning to
       the car resulting in an overstay of 10/20 mins (exact time not
       known as purchased ticket not kept)
       Keeper did not take picture of parking signs but found this
       picture online (also see attached)
  HTML https://www.searchforsites.co.uk/image.php?src=24897_1632245139_app.jpg
       The keeper appealed the PCN as follows:
       “ I dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle.
       I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be
       making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client
       landowner.
       There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no
       assumptions can be drawn. Since your PCN is a vague template, I
       require an explanation of the allegation and your evidence. You
       must include a close up actual photograph of the sign you
       contend was at the location on the material date as well as your
       images of the vehicle.
       If the allegation concerns a PDT machine, the data supplied in
       response to this appeal must include the record of payments made
       - showing partial VRNs - and an explanation of the reason for
       the PCN, because your Notice does not explain it.
       If the allegation involves an alleged overstay of minutes, your
       evidence must include the actual grace period agreed by the
       landowner.”
       The keeper received letters from Trace and more recently
       Moorside legal chasing payment but they have been ignored.
       Last week a letter of claim was received from moorside, dated 18
       June.
       Any advice on how to respond would be much appreciated
       Thanks
       
       [attachment deleted by admin]
       #Post#: 78770--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Alliance Parking PCN - Trevone Beach - Overstay
       By: b789 Date: June 29, 2025, 7:10 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Respond to the LoC by email to help@moorsidelegal.co.uk and also
       CC in yourself, with the following:
       [quote]Dear Sirs,
       Your Letter Before Claim contains insufficient detail of the
       claim and fails to provide copies of evidence your client places
       reliance upon and thus is in complete contravention 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 I decline to do so. As there is no legal
       presumption that the keeper of a vehicle was its driver on any
       particular occasion, your client cannot pursue me as driver as
       per VCS v Edward (2023) [H0KF6C9C]
  HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/yvxek3kfwtb3qent3lj6y/VCS-Limited-v-Ian-Mark-Edward-H0KF6C9C.pdf?rlkey=niecohfdtj1n1ysh5prbsp52p&e=1&dl=0.
       As your client cannot pursue me as driver or keeper, it would be
       an abuse of the court’s process for your client to issue a claim
       against me and I will defend any such claim vigorously and seek
       costs in relation to your client’s unreasonable and vexatious
       conduct under Part 27.14(2)(g)
       Because your letter lacks specificity and breaches 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)), you
       must treat this letter as a formal request for all of the
       documents/information that the protocol now requires your client
       to provide. Your client must not issue proceedings without
       complying with that protocol.
       As solicitors you must surely be familiar with the requirements
       of both the Practice Direction and the Pre-Action Protocol for
       debt claims and your client, as a serial litigator of debt
       claims, should likewise be aware of them. As you (and your
       client) must know, the Practice Direction and Protocol bind all
       potential litigants, whatever the size or type of the claim. Its
       express purpose is to assist parties in understanding the claim
       and their respective positions in relation to it, to enable
       parties to take stock of their positions and to negotiate a
       settlement, or at least narrow the issues, without incurring the
       costs of court proceedings or using up valuable court time. It
       is embarrassing that a firm of Solicitors are sending a consumer
       a vague and un-evidenced 'Letter of Claim' in complete ignorance
       of the pre-existing Practice Direction and the Pre-Action
       Protocol.
       I confirm that, once I am in receipt of a Letter Before Claim
       that complies with the requirements of para 3.1 (a) of the
       Pre-Action Protocol, I shall then seek advice and submit a
       formal response within 30 days, as required by the Protocol.
       Thus, I require your client to comply with its obligations by
       sending me the following information/documents:
       [indent]1. An explanation of the cause of action
       2. whether they are pursuing me as driver or keeper
       3. whether they are relying on the provisions of Schedule 4 of
       POFA 2012
       4. what the details of the claim are; for how long it is claimed
       the vehicle was parked, how the monies being claimed arose and
       have been calculated
       5. Is the claim for a contractual breach? If so, what is the
       date of the agreement? The names of the parties to it and
       provide to me a copy of that contract.
       6. If the claim is for a contractual breach, photographs showing
       the vehicle was parked in contravention of said contract.
       7. Is the claim for trespass? If so, provide details.
       8. Provide me a copy of the contract with the landowner under
       which they assert authority to bring the claim, as required by
       the BPA/IPC Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP).
       9. a plan showing where any signs were displayed
       10. Photographs of the signs displayed (size of sign, size of
       font, height at which displayed) at the time of any alleged
       contravention.
       11. Provide details of the original charge, and detail any
       interest and administrative or other charges added
       12. Am I to understand that the additional £70 represents what
       is dressed up as a 'Debt Recovery' fee, and if so, is this nett
       or inclusive of VAT? If the latter, would you kindly explain why
       I am being asked to pay the operator’s VAT?
       13. With regard to the principal alleged PCN sum: Is this
       damages, or will it be pleaded as consideration for
       parking?[/indent]
       I am clearly entitled to this information under paragraphs 6(a)
       and 6(c) of the Practice Direction. I also need it in order to
       comply with my own obligations under paragraph 6(b).
       If your client does not provide me with this information then I
       put you on notice that I will be relying on the cases of Webb
       Resolutions Ltd v Waller Needham & Green [2012] EWHC 3529 (Ch),
       Daejan Investments Limited v The Park West Club Limited (Part
       20) Buxton Associates [2003] EWHC 2872, Charles Church
       Developments Ltd v Stent Foundations Limited & Peter Dann
       Limited [2007] EWHC 855 in asking the court to impose sanctions
       on your client and to order a stay of the proceedings, pursuant
       to paragraphs 13, 15(b) and (c) and 16 of the Practice
       Direction, as referred to in paragraph 7.2 of the Protocol.
       Until your client has complied with its obligations and provided
       this information, I am unable to respond properly to the alleged
       claim and to consider my position in relation to it, and it is
       entirely premature (and a waste of costs and court time) for
       your client to issue proceedings. Should your client do so, then
       I will seek an immediate stay pursuant to paragraph 15(b) of the
       Practice Direction and an order that this information is
       provided.
       Yours faithfully,
       [Your name][/quote]
       #Post#: 78814--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Alliance Parking PCN - Trevone Beach - Overstay
       By: Trousers37 Date: June 29, 2025, 4:14 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Thanks so much for the advice.
       Will send across today.
       Out of interest - what are the likely next steps after this?
       #Post#: 78829--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Alliance Parking PCN - Trevone Beach - Overstay
       By: b789 Date: June 30, 2025, 1:53 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       A claim will be issued. We will provide a suitable defence and
       advice on how to submit that when you show us the N1SDT Claim
       Form with the Particulars of Claim (PoC). When you do, you only
       need to redact your personal info, the claim number and the MCOL
       password. ALL dates must be left visible.
       AS the incompetents at Moorside Legal will fail to comply with
       the PAP, you should also report them to the SRA.
       #Post#: 78831--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Alliance Parking PCN - Trevone Beach - Overstay
       By: Trousers37 Date: June 30, 2025, 1:59 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Thanks appreciate that
       Just for my clarification, the letter of claims asks for £170.
       In the suggested response above:
       “ 12. Am I to understand that the additional £70 represents what
       is dressed up as a 'Debt Recovery' fee, and if so, is this nett
       or inclusive of VAT? If the latter, would you kindly explain why
       I am being asked to pay the operator’s VAT?”
       Is the additional £70 a standard uplift that is applied to
       Alliance’s PCN notice? (Sorry don’t have original letters to
       hand at the moment as away)
       Thanks
       #Post#: 78834--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Alliance Parking PCN - Trevone Beach - Overstay
       By: b789 Date: June 30, 2025, 2:16 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Yes, we know. The charge in the PCN was for £100. They have
       added a fake additional £70 to that sum, hence the claim is now
       for £170.
       #Post#: 90460--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Alliance Parking PCN - Trevone Beach - Overstay
       By: Trousers37 Date: September 18, 2025, 2:25 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi
       Keeper of vehicle received an email from Moorside asking:
       “To enable us to process your email, we need to confirm that we
       are corresponding with the correct individual. To pass our
       security checks, we ask that you confirm the following:
       Address and post code
       Vehicle registration
       Please reply to this email to continue the email thread.”
       Assume no issue for the keeper to provide this information?
       Thanks
       #Post#: 90486--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Alliance Parking PCN - Trevone Beach - Overstay
       By: b789 Date: September 18, 2025, 6:22 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Is that the full response you have had to the response I advised
       you to send a couple of months ago? I doubt it, so please show
       their full response.
       #Post#: 90488--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Alliance Parking PCN - Trevone Beach - Overstay
       By: b789 Date: September 18, 2025, 6:30 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       You can respond with the following:
       [quote]Subject: Re: Your so-called “security checks” – [Your
       ref]
       Dear Sirs,
       It beggars belief that your firm, having sent me a Letter of
       Claim to my correct address and clearly holding my vehicle
       details, now demands that I “pass security” by confirming the
       very information you already possess. Such conduct typifies the
       incompetence for which you are becoming notorious.
       Let me be absolutely clear: I will not be using any so-called
       “portal”. You may communicate with me by email or by post, at
       your discretion. Any further attempts to impose artificial
       obstacles to correspondence will simply be treated as further
       evidence of unreasonable conduct and brought to the court’s
       attention in due course.
       You are required to cease these time-wasting antics and provide
       a full and substantive response to my letter of [date], in
       strict compliance with the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims.
       Should your client proceed to issue proceedings without first
       complying with their obligations, I will seek an immediate stay
       under the Practice Direction – Pre-Action Conduct (paragraph
       15(b)) and invite the court to impose sanctions.
       Yours faithfully,
       [Name][/quote]
       #Post#: 90569--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Alliance Parking PCN - Trevone Beach - Overstay
       By: Trousers37 Date: September 18, 2025, 5:02 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Correct. That’s what they have responded with.
       No correspondence received in the post. This is first point of
       contact received after sending the detailed reply as
       recommended.
       The email is a reply to that response sent to Moorside by email.
       And simply says
       “ Thank you for your email.
       To enable us to process your email, we need to confirm that we
       are corresponding with the correct individual. To pass our
       security checks, we ask that you confirm the following:
       Address and post code
       Vehicle registration
       Please reply to this email to continue the email thread.
       Yours sincerely
       Moorside Legal”
       *****************************************************
   DIR Next Page