Show Posts - bertie21980

Quote from: DWMB2 on 22 Feb, 2026 20:47If the reference number is the same then it should relate to the same claim. If responding again, as well as whatever you're planning to respond with, I would also open by pointing out that this is the second Letter of Claim they have sent in respect of the same claim.I have noticed this is the second letter regarding the same claim you made on the 25th of October last year. So, for confirmation, can you please provide more details of this particular claim. The failure to provide copies of the evidence your client places reliance upon, put its in clear breach of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims.Maybe I can respond like this and then copy and paste my previous message as before?

Hi everyone, I recently received another Letter Before Claim from Moorside Legal. Its seems almost exactly the same as my previous LBC which is also in this thread.It might even be for another parking claim that I'm going through but the reference number is exactly the same as my previous one above. Anyway, Im going to reply to them the exact same email message as I did before. If anyone thinks otherwise that I would welcome the advice

Hello everyone, I received an email from Moorside Legal yesterday, responding to my previous email. Any idea on how I should respond back? I'm guessing I should ignore it.QuoteWe write in relation to the above matter.  The pcn was issued for No valid parking session registered on the 4/16/2025.By entering and parking the vehicle on our client's private 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 in prominent places. Due to your failure to comply with the terms and conditions, our client has issued the PCN.  Considering the evidence, we are satisfied that the PCN has been issued in line with industry standards and is compliant with the International Parking Community’s (IPC) code of practice. The signage of the car park also complies with the International Parking Community’s Code of Practice.below is a breakdown Why is there an additional £70 added to the PCN amount?Because the Parking Charge remained unpaid after it was due. Our Client made you aware that additional charges could be applied to the Parking Charge if it was not paid on time. They informed you of this on the parking signs and on any notices either placed on the vehicle or sent to you by post. How is the £70 made up?£70 is the amount set out in both the British Parking Association and International Parking Association 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 is a member of ipc which is a government approved Accredited Trade Association (ATA) for Private Parking. Our Client adheres to the ATA’s Code of Practice. The £70 is a charge levied by our Client (the Parking Operator) to protect their legitimate interests. (Our Client’s legitimate interests for charging and additional fee is to encourage payment when the Parking Charge becomes due and to avoid the need for debt recovery.)  We ask that you make the full payment of £170.00 within 7 days of receipt of this email.  You can make payment in the following ways:  Contact us on 0330 822 9950 (our opening times are Monday- Friday 9:00- 17:00); portal.moorsidelegal.co.uk - Login to our portalhttps://pay.moorside.legal - Quick Pay  If you fail to respond or make payment, we may be instructed by our client to issue legal proceedings against you. This will incur further costs and fees that will be added to the outstanding balance. You may wish to seek independent legal advice.    Yours sincerely,Moorside Legal

Thank you for the advice, b789. I just sent the email now

Hi guys, I recently got this 'Letter Before Claim' letter from Moorside Legal. Is this the letter I'm suppose to respond to? Its not even clear which penalty they are referring to as it just says their client is from PCM which I assume is for this penalty claim

Quote from: Incandescent on 20 Aug, 2025 00:15Well, of course you take these rapacious and venal administrators to London Tribunals ! The PCN penalty remains the same and there are no additional costs. You have a reasonable appeal argument, so it could go either way.At least if you lose they will have had to do at least some work for their money, and they have to pay the adjudication fee out of it.Thanks for the response. I will take it to the tribunal. Whatever the result, it will be a big learning curve

Hi guys, I completely forgot about this pcn and done a appeal after 28 days. The appeal was rejected and I'm now willing to pay for it but the discount rate has now finished. They now have given me a choice of paying the fine of £160 or to appeal to the traffic adjudicators. What do you guys recommend?

Hi guys, I have appeal as suggested previously stating that I refused to accept the PCN and they have replied stating that I should mention the driver...A few weeks ago, I also did a subject data request as well...Anyway, I'm guessing I should ignore the request of stating who the driver is?

Hi again, I received a PCN for going through a motor prohibition sign without knowing. Here is the PCN... There is also a video but I'm not sure how to paste the clip on this site.From my knowledge, there is a restriction from one side of this sign. There is no restriction when coming from the back of this sign. I had a delivery the national theatre but was trying to find the stage door which I found out its on a road called stage door avenue. When I realised I was already past it, I decided to do u-turn immediately and unfortunately I did it just past this sign. As mentioned before, I believe there is no sign when coming from one direction so as I decided to do the u-turn, I was not aware of any restriction. As I finished my 3 point turn, I went through the sign. At present, I can't recall seeing the sign as I went past it.Here is the google map view...https://maps.app.goo.gl/UKSL1f177aoexacm7Still trying to work out through my head, exactly how this happened. Normally, I would do a u-turn where there is space to do so. I'm guessing I thought I had enough space to do the turn without checking n( obviously I checked for pedestrians and cyclist etc). Anyway, is there a chance I can appeal as I don't recall seeing the sign as I went past it?

Quote from: MrChips on 03 Jun, 2025 08:00Can't see any issues with the video footage, it's an open and shut case in that respect!The date on the PCN is almost three months after the date of the contravention. Is the vehicle leased, hired, or any other reason why this might be? Normally the council only gets 28 days to serve it.The PCN has a very specific timing for the contravention, including the seconds.  Technically the offence occurs when the driver causes the vehicle to enter the box junction in the first place which is a few seconds earlier than stated - but I don't think this would be a strong point of appeal!Yes, it is a hired vehicle. The driver no longer hires the car. I suppose as it happened around 3 months ago is probably the reason why my friend was surprised at receiving the PCN

Hello, a driver I know received a PCN for entering a box junction. I've looked at the video and the driver is on the junction for about 2 minutes so I can't see any other option but to pay it. But I was wondering if the roadworks on the box junction could possibly be a factor in any way.Street view...https://maps.app.goo.gl/68eEtpMRqwQkQKSQ6Any help would be appreciated.

Quote from: John_S on 29 May, 2025 14:08Sorry that I’m a little late with this post, but I’ve just begun dealing with a similar PCN relating to this location. Having checked the signs at the location I’m confident that the main pedestrian zone signs and the advance warning sign(s) do not comply with the TSRGD. I’m just waiting for a reply to a FOIA request and I’ll be able to add more detail. This is on top of the other grounds already mentioned.I had to google what TSRGD is. It still bothers me that I received this PCN despite sings telling me I was allowed to use this road if I was delivering. Why not have the camera placed so it can show that I was loading there?Just noticed that the appeal letter mentions that I could apply for an exemption the next time I use this road.Anyway, I hope it goes well for you

Yes, I did received the letter back a few days ago and it was a success   Thank you guys for all the help. I did decided on the delivery evidence as being my primary grounds for representations but also mentioned about the error of the PCN regarding the truncation.Apologies for not responding earlier. Had an issue with my phone but its ok now. Very thankful for all the help

OK I see. Thank you for the advice. I will appeal this right away. Not surprised they will reject it but I will be expecting it nevertheless. I never thought about how they managed to find out that my vehicle was parked for 14 minutes so now I will keep that in mind.They have already sent me a final reminder through the post today. I only received the PCN through the post roughly 2 weeks ago

Hello everyone. I got another parking ticket from another private operator, UKPC. I was parked on a bay on Sunbeam Road, which is a private road. Apparently, this bay is for registered users only and I was parked here for 14 minutes and 5 seconds.Here is the PCN...https://maps.app.goo.gl/z65pwyhVT1qMePLD6Here is the link of the street view above. I parked on the bay on the right, just where that black car is.I was parked here as I was doing a delivery for a company called Ateliers London to pick up a sofa. I was given an incorrect address of 17 - 21 sunbeam road which is why I was parked there for so long as I couldn't find the company. The actual address is on the same road but slightly further up (the building at the end with the white triangular roof). Will I still be able to appeal with my original delivery notes? I understand this is a private company so I assume they will reject my appeals regardless of any loading notes. Any help would be appreciated.