Subject: Your Letter of Claim – Ref: [reference number]; PCN: [xxxxx]; VRM: [ABC123]; Site/Date: [site], [dd/mm/yyyy]
Dear Sirs,
Thank you for your email of [date]. It does, however, confirm that whoever drafted it has not understood either my previous letter or the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims.
For ease of reference, I will deal with matters in short points.
1. Non-compliance with PAPDC/PD-PAC
Your response fails to comply with the Protocol and Practice Direction. You have still not supplied key documents, including contemporaneous photographs of the vehicle and signage on the material date, a site plan showing sign locations, any statement of account explaining how you leap from the original PCN to the inflated sum claimed (with dates, amounts and the alleged contractual or statutory basis of each item), or any landowner authority (even in redacted form) evidencing that UKCPM has standing to issue PCNs and litigate in its own name at Brooklands Court, New Haw.
The Protocol requires you to provide key documents so that a prospective defendant can understand and narrow the issues, not to send a template stock answer and expect blind acceptance of bare assertions. A contract, the terms allegedly accepted, and evidence of your client’s standing are not optional extras. They are central to any cause of action and fall squarely within PAPDC 3.1 and PD-PAC 6(a) and 6(c).
If you continue to refuse to provide core documents, that will be relied upon in any costs argument as unreasonable pre-action conduct.
2. Presumption of delivery and PoFA “unless the contrary is proved”
You state that it is unnecessary for your client to provide proof of delivery and then recite the well-known deemed service provision in Schedule 4 to the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.
I am fully aware that PoFA provides a rebuttable presumption that a notice sent by post is deemed delivered on the second working day after posting. That does not mean that proof of posting is irrelevant, or that service can never be challenged, or that a defendant is not entitled at the pre-action stage to see basic evidence of when and where documents were allegedly sent and to what address.
“Unless the contrary is proved” is precisely the point. The presumption is not conclusive. Dates of issue, dates of posting, the method of posting and the address used are all matters of evidence. A solicitor who thinks that quoting the presumption somehow relieves the claimant of any burden of proof has not grasped even the rudiments of PoFA or civil evidence.
My original request was for copies of the NtK/NtD with all pages, dates of posting, and proof of service. The partial response you have given (a bare copy of a PCN) does not comply with that request or with the Protocol.
3. Standing and landowner authority
You say you will not provide a copy of the agreement with the landowner because it is commercially sensitive and will only be produced if the matter progresses to formal hearing at court.
That is an untenable stance and is flatly contrary to the spirit and letter of the Protocol. Your client’s locus standi is a fundamental element of any claim. A bare assertion that “our Client holds the necessary right” is not evidence and would not be accepted as such at trial.
Pre-action, the court expects disclosure of the core documents that will be relied upon, so that claims without merit can be weeded out and issues narrowed. It is perfectly possible to provide a redacted agreement, a witness statement from the landowner, or some other competent proof of authority. Your client’s insistence on secrecy at this stage is a red flag, not a virtue, and will be drawn to the court’s attention if proceedings are issued.
For the avoidance of doubt, I put your client to strict proof of their authority to operate the site at Brooklands Court, New Haw, and to issue PCNs and pursue court proceedings in their own name.
Your refusal to provide any such proof now will form part of my evidence on any application for directions or costs.
4. Debt recovery add-ons
Your paragraph about “debt recovery costs” being contractually agreed and recognised by the courts is pure assertion with no legal analysis.
You have still not identified the specific term in the alleged contract which you say permits any sum above £100, addressed the requirement that such a term be fair and transparent under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and properly brought to the motorist’s attention, or explained how any added sum is not a penalty or unlawful double recovery given that your client’s alleged “debt recovery” is simply part of its ordinary business model and already priced into the core charge.
There is now a substantial body of County Court authority that such additional sums are irrecoverable in private parking claims and amount to an abuse of process. Simply asserting that “the courts recognise” these costs, without citation, does not make it so.
I repeat my request for a full, itemised statement of account from the original PCN to the total now claimed, identifying each sum, the date applied, and the legal or contractual basis you say entitles your client to recover it.
5. Your internal arrangements and authorisation
Your letter reads like a standardised script generated by someone who has not read or is incapable of comprehending the Protocol, my previous letter, or Schedule 4 PoFA, and who plainly does not understand the issues raised.
Please ensure that any further substantive response is prepared by, or under the actual supervision of, an individual authorised under the Legal Services Act 2007 to conduct litigation, and is based on a proper review of the file and the questions put to you.
If you are unable or unwilling to engage at that level, there is little point in further pre-action correspondence.
6. Portal and method of communication
Once again, I do not consent to the use of your “Customer Portal” or any similar web platform. The Protocol does not entitle you to force defendants into your marketing systems.
All future correspondence must be sent by email to [your email] and, where required, by post to [your postal address] only.
7. Next steps
My position remains that the alleged debt is disputed in full. Unless and until you comply with your obligations under PAPDC and PD-PAC and provide the documents and information I reasonably require, I am unable to narrow the issues any further.
If you choose to issue proceedings without first providing proper disclosure of the alleged contract and terms, your client’s standing, contemporaneous photographs and signage evidence, and a coherent breakdown and legal basis for every element of the sum claimed, I will invite the court to stay the proceedings and order you to provide the same material you should have provided now, and to take your unreasonable pre-action conduct into account when considering any costs under CPR 27.14.
This correspondence will be placed before the court at the appropriate time.
Yours faithfully,
[Your name]
Respond to that LoC as follows:QuoteSubject: Response to your Letter of Claim – Ref: [reference number]; PCN: [xxxxx]; VRM: [ABC123]; Site/Date: [site], [dd/mm/yyyy]
Dear Sirs,
This is my formal response under the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims. I dispute the debt. Your Letter of Claim contains insufficient detail and omits documents you intend to rely upon, contrary to PAPDC 3.1(a)–(d) and 3.1(3), and Practice Direction – Pre-Action Conduct (PD-PAC) 6(a) and 6(c).
The Protocol requires sufficient information and disclosure of key documents to enable an informed response. Your template refers to a “contract” but encloses none.
Pursuant to PAPDC/PD-PAC, please provide:1. The Notice to Keeper (and any prior NtD) with all pages, dates of posting, and proof of service.
2. Confirmation whether you rely on PoFA 2012 Schedule 4; if so, a point-by-point explanation of compliance.
3. Contemporaneous, legible photographs of the signage in place on the material date, and a site plan marking sign locations.
4. The precise contractual wording allegedly accepted and the clause(s) said to be breached, and whether you plead a contractual sum or damages.
5. The landowner authority/chain permitting UKCPM to issue PCNs and to litigate in its own name at Brooklands Court, New Haw.
6. An up-to-date statement of account from the original PCN to the claimed total, identifying each item (parking charge, any “debt recovery”/“legal costs”/interest), the date applied, and the legal/contractual basis for each; confirm whether interest is claimed and the rate and start date.
7. If any sum above £100 is sought, the precise term said to permit it and whether any part represents VAT.
Protocol hold: Under PAPDC 5.2 and 7.1–7.2, confirm that (i) the matter is placed on hold immediately and (ii) no proceedings will be issued for at least 30 days after you supply the above documents/evidence.
Until compliant disclosure is given, I cannot respond substantively. On receipt of a compliant LoC bundle, I will respond within 30 days as the Protocol contemplates.
If you issue regardless of these requests, I will place this correspondence before the Court and seek appropriate case-management orders (including a stay) and costs for unreasonable non-compliance (PD-PAC 15).
I do not consent to using any web portal. Correspondence by email to: [your email] and by post to: [your postal address] only.
Yours faithfully,
[Your name]
Subject: Response to your Letter of Claim – Ref: [reference number]; PCN: [xxxxx]; VRM: [ABC123]; Site/Date: [site], [dd/mm/yyyy]
Dear Sirs,
This is my formal response under the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims. I dispute the debt. Your Letter of Claim contains insufficient detail and omits documents you intend to rely upon, contrary to PAPDC 3.1(a)–(d) and 3.1(3), and Practice Direction – Pre-Action Conduct (PD-PAC) 6(a) and 6(c).
The Protocol requires sufficient information and disclosure of key documents to enable an informed response. Your template refers to a “contract” but encloses none.
Pursuant to PAPDC/PD-PAC, please provide:1. The Notice to Keeper (and any prior NtD) with all pages, dates of posting, and proof of service.
2. Confirmation whether you rely on PoFA 2012 Schedule 4; if so, a point-by-point explanation of compliance.
3. Contemporaneous, legible photographs of the signage in place on the material date, and a site plan marking sign locations.
4. The precise contractual wording allegedly accepted and the clause(s) said to be breached, and whether you plead a contractual sum or damages.
5. The landowner authority/chain permitting UKCPM to issue PCNs and to litigate in its own name at Brooklands Court, New Haw.
6. An up-to-date statement of account from the original PCN to the claimed total, identifying each item (parking charge, any “debt recovery”/“legal costs”/interest), the date applied, and the legal/contractual basis for each; confirm whether interest is claimed and the rate and start date.
7. If any sum above £100 is sought, the precise term said to permit it and whether any part represents VAT.
Protocol hold: Under PAPDC 5.2 and 7.1–7.2, confirm that (i) the matter is placed on hold immediately and (ii) no proceedings will be issued for at least 30 days after you supply the above documents/evidence.
Until compliant disclosure is given, I cannot respond substantively. On receipt of a compliant LoC bundle, I will respond within 30 days as the Protocol contemplates.
If you issue regardless of these requests, I will place this correspondence before the Court and seek appropriate case-management orders (including a stay) and costs for unreasonable non-compliance (PD-PAC 15).
I do not consent to using any web portal. Correspondence by email to: [your email] and by post to: [your postal address] only.
Yours faithfully,
[Your name]
Please show us the content of the LoC and anything they included as “evidence”. We do not need to see any of the other forms they may have included with it. Just the wording of their claim.
Ignore the advice I gave about the IAS appeal. I was under the impression you had received an appeal rejection just recently.
Once you’ve shown us the content of the LoC, we can advise on the response.
So when you sayQuoteI will do the appeal in IAS, as you recommend.you are far too late in the process to do this.
I will do the appeal in IAS, as you recommend.you are far too late in the process to do this.
You should not have received a Letter of Claim for a PCN you are appealing, including the appeal to the IAS. The Letter of Claim should only be issued once all appeal avenues have been closed, and usually after a number of letters from debt collectors. Something is wrong if you have a Letter of Claim for a PCN which is still under an appeal process.
Are you conflating two different PCNs here?
QuoteAm I missing something very basic?From the "Read this first" thread:QuoteThere is some upload space on this site but it's quite limited, so it's best to upload to a picture hosting site (such as https://imgbb.com/ (https://imgbb.com/) or similar) and post links - see Posting Images (https://www.ftla.uk/announcements/posting-images/#new) for more info
Am I missing something very basic?From the "Read this first" thread:
There is some upload space on this site but it's quite limited, so it's best to upload to a picture hosting site (such as https://imgbb.com/ (https://imgbb.com/) or similar) and post links - see Posting Images (https://www.ftla.uk/announcements/posting-images/#new) for more info
ld be useful if you could either show us an image of the LoC or at least tell us which firm of bulk litigators has sent it.
They say I can pay, or contact to say reasons for no payment.
If no contact (or payment) is made, the next stage will be a Letter of Claim.
So, It is NOT an LoC and can therefore be shredded and used a hamster bedding for anyone cares.
Come back when they send you an actual LoC.
They say I can pay, or contact to say reasons for no payment.
If no contact (or payment) is made, the next stage will be a Letter of Claim.
You MUST send a data rectification notice to the DPO of CPM which instructs them to update their records with your current address for service and to erase your old address. The highlighted words are there for a reason, so use them.
Their DPO can emailed at dpo@uk-cpm.com. Make sure you also CC yourself in that email.
No, they won’t necessarily check, not least because it can mean a default judgement in their favour at court followed by someone taking more effort to track you down at your new address and - hey presto - you have a problem.
You need to send a data rectification notice to CPM or whoever it was who first sent you a PCN.Quoteinstruct them to update their records with your correct address for service and to erase your old address. The words are there for a reason... use them.
instruct them to update their records with your correct address for service and to erase your old address. The words are there for a reason... use them.
Ignore Debt Recovery Plus - they're not interested in any conversation that doesn't involve payment. File and ignore. You're waiting for a Letter of Claim, or a Claim Form from the county court.
Well, if I do not appeal to IAS, what else can I do?
CPM declined my appeal and said the PCN stands...
Less than 5% of IAS appeals are upheld. Therefore, an appeal to the IAS is a waste of time. If you feel the need to do so, then go ahead but we don't have enough time or resource to put one together.
This is more likely going to be won in court. It probably wouldn't even get that far as they would likely discontinue before they had to try and prove their point.
Have a search for similar POPLA appeals on here for an idea on how to do it.
an appeal to thejokersIAS will fail thats almost guaranteed but a member will give you more advice on that and how to proceed.
ooking at GSV I would suggest if the OP was parked where the red Corsa is then they were on Westfield Parade and neither in the private area not the station car park. there appears to be the remnants of a white line across the estate entrance just behind the Corsa. Boundary delineation??
Those GSV images are from April 2018, nearly 9 years ago.your time machine needs adjustment b789 ::)
Those GSV images are from April 2018, nearly 9 years ago.your time machine needs adjustment b789 ::)
Those GSV images are from April 2018, nearly 9 years ago. You were either parked on the estate where parking is managed by CPM or you were parked in the station car park. Who manages the station car park?
Unless you can get the Land Registry plans or something to show the boundaries, this is going toe difficult to advise on.
Do you have photos of the location, or alternatively, a Google Street View link?
you no longer have the PCN??
was it affixed to the car or sent through the post?
where was this? GSV location please
did you read this..
READ THIS FIRST - **BEFORE POSTING YOUR CASE!**,
https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/