Free Traffic Legal Advice

Quote from: FaeLLe on September 09, 2025, 04:08:54 pm

Can someone please advice if the content of this 'Traffic Order' would be considered sufficient to make this order / offence binding?

Yes, why wouldn't it?

20mph signage in place too - Here.

Respond to BW Legal LoC with the following:

Quote

Dear Sirs,

Re: Letter of Claim dated 24th March 2025

I refer to your Letter of Claim.

I confirm that my address for service at this time is as follows, and I request that any outdated address be erased from your records to ensure compliance with data protection obligations:

[YOUR ADDRESS]

Please note that the alleged debt is disputed, and any court proceedings will be robustly defended.

I note that the sum claimed has been increased by an excessive and unjustifiable amount, which appears contrary to the principles established by the Government, who described such practices as “extorting money from motorists.” Please refrain from sending boilerplate responses or justifications regarding this issue.

Under the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims, I require specific answers to the following questions:

1. Does the additional £120 represent what you describe as a “Debt Recovery” fee? If so, is this figure net of or inclusive of VAT? If inclusive, I trust you will explain why I, as the alleged debtor, am being asked to cover your client’s VAT liability.

2. Regarding the principal sum of the alleged Parking Charge Notices (PCNs): Is this being claimed as damages for breach of contract, or will it be pleaded as consideration for a purported parking contract?

I would caution you against simply dismissing these questions with vague or boilerplate responses, as I am fully aware of the implications. By claiming that PCNs are exempt from VAT while simultaneously inflating the debt recovery element, your client – with your assistance – appears to be evading VAT obligations due to HMRC. Such mendacious conduct raises serious questions about the legality and ethics of your practices.

I strongly advise your client to cease and desist. Should this matter proceed to court, you can be assured that these issues will be brought to the court’s attention, alongside a robust defence and potentially a counterclaim for unreasonable conduct.

Yours faithfully,


[YOUR NAME]

...but the driver took the same entry and exit.

But which ones? Your plan marks entrances and exits identically.

18.12 To comply with all the obligations imposed upon the Landlord by a Superior Landlord if the Property is held under a Superior Lease. 18.13 To take all reasonable steps to ensure that the Superior Landlord complies with the obligations of the Superior Lease.

There's your fatal mistake where you admitted being the driver:

OP, where's the RK's first 'appeal', we need to know what's already been conceded.


RED X marks the entry and exit of the private parking area

Sorry, but hardly useful because GSV suggests these are entrances and exits. As you want to draw attention to a broken sign then we need to know its relevance and which entrance(s) were actually used?

As regards where the RK is - providing that they have not conceded who was driving on each* occasion- this suffices IMO:

I have noted the contents of your refusal to cancel the Notice to Keeper and will advise the driver accordingly. This concludes my involvement in this matter as you are not claiming to have the prospective right to pursue me for any unpaid parking charges.

First appeal sent to them before they spoke to me (this is the same correspondence date quoted in the PCN APPEAL REJECTION) :

Response rejection (the attachment rejection uploaded previously is from the same date):