Author Topic: Debt Recovery Letter from TRACE (NCP Gatwick)  (Read 1948 times)

0 Members and 331 Guests are viewing this topic.

Debt Recovery Letter from TRACE (NCP Gatwick)
« on: »
Received Debt Recovery Letter from TRACE – Confused About Process and Next Steps

Hi all,
I received a letter from TRACE Debt Recovery dated Friday 20th June regarding an alleged non-payment to National Car Parks (NCP) for a drop-off at Gatwick Airport.

Some background for context:
  • I am the registered keeper of the vehicle (as per the V5C).
  • The vehicle is registered at my former address, where my sister and mother currently live.
  • Although the car is legally mine, they have been using it regularly for the past 18 months. I didn’t change the address on the V5C as it made things easier for them to manage MOT, insurance, servicing, etc.
  • After receiving the TRACE letter, I spoke to my sister who has now found an unopened letter from NCP (photo attached) at the old address regarding the original PCN (photo attached).
  • What’s puzzling is that TRACE managed to send the debt recovery letter to my current address, where I’ve been living for around 3 years. I’m not sure how they obtained this.

My questions:

Grateful for any help or insight.

Thanks in advance.




### Trace Debt Recovery






### NCP
Apologies for the poor quality of the NCP images.



« Last Edit: June 23, 2025, 11:51:23 am by bigred247 »

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


Re: Debt Recovery Letter from TRACE (NCP Gatwick)
« Reply #1 on: »
Too late appeal now but nothing to worry about. Ignore Trace and any other useless debt collector. They are powerless to do anything except to try and persuade the low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree to pay up out of ignorance and fear.

There is zero risk of a CCJ, even if this were one of the less than 0.1% of cases that ever made it as far as court and you lost. They have no idea of the drivers identity and unless the Keeper blabs it to them, they have nowhere togo with this as the Notice to Keeper (NtK) was not delivered within the relevant period to be able to rely on PoFA 2012 to hold the Keeper liable.
However, anything going forwards has to be in the name of the Registered Keeper, irrespective of who was driving. No "on behalf of" but in the Keeper name.

For now, I advise that you email the following as a formal complaint to NCP as the registered Keeper. Address it to customer.service@ncp.co.uk and also CC in yourself:

Quote
Subject: Formal Complaint and Challenge to Keeper Liability – PCN [Insert Reference Number]

Dear Sir/Madam,

I write as the Registered Keeper of the vehicle with registration number [INSERT REG] in relation to the above-referenced Parking Charge Notice (PCN), which I have only recently become aware of following a letter from a debt recovery agency (Trace) sent to my current address.

Upon investigation, I discovered that the original Notice to Keeper (NtK) was sent to a former address where I no longer reside. This address remains on the vehicle’s V5C due to an administrative oversight, although my relatives still reside there. The NtK was only recently retrieved and had been overlooked.

Having reviewed the NtK, I note that it was not issued within the statutory timeframe required under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA). As such, you have failed to meet the conditions necessary to hold the Registered Keeper liable for the alleged charge. Specifically, the NtK was not delivered within the period prescribed by Paragraph 9(5) of Schedule 4, which requires delivery within 14 days of the alleged contravention where no Notice to Driver was issued.

Accordingly, I reject any attempt to hold me liable as Keeper. You are not entitled to pursue me under PoFA, and I will not be naming the driver. I therefore require that you cancel this PCN immediately and confirm in writing that no further action will be taken.

This letter also serves as a formal complaint regarding your failure to comply with PoFA and your inappropriate escalation to a debt recovery agency without first ensuring proper service of the NtK. I expect this complaint to be handled in accordance with your published complaints procedure.

Separately, I will be submitting a Data Rectification Notice under Article 16 of the UK GDPR to update my address for service and require that you erase the former address from your records under Article 17(1)(d), as it is no longer accurate or necessary for processing.

Please confirm receipt of this complaint and your intended actions within 14 days.

Yours faithfully,

[Your Full Name]
[Current Address]
[Email Address – optional]
[Date]

Also send a Data Rectification Notice (DRN) to the NCP DPO at dataprotection@ncp.co.uk and again, CC in yourself. A DRN must instruct the company 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.
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Love Love x 1 View List

Re: Debt Recovery Letter from TRACE (NCP Gatwick)
« Reply #2 on: »
A small aside to the above, I note that you mention you have deliberately left the car registered at your old address because it makes it easier for your relatives who still use the car. Whilst this is your choice, it may be worth reconsidering.

There is no requirement for the vehicle to be registered at an address you are living at, but the address on the V5C should be one at which you are able to promptly and reliably receive/respond to mail. Given that you only found out in June about a letter sent to you in April, it would seem this might not be the case. If this letter had been an notice from the police regarding speeding (for example), rather than a private parking charge, you'd probably now be facing prosecution for failing to name the driver.

Re: Debt Recovery Letter from TRACE (NCP Gatwick)
« Reply #3 on: »
@b789
Thank you very much your feedback and the template. This is greatly appreciated. I'll go ahead and action per your instructions.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2025, 01:25:35 pm by bigred247 »

Re: Debt Recovery Letter from TRACE (NCP Gatwick)
« Reply #4 on: »
...the Notice to Keeper (NtK) was not delivered within the relevant period to be able to rely on PoFA 2012 to hold the Keeper liable.
The land isn't Relevant Land as per POFA anyway, as Airport Byelaws apply, so it cannot be applied regardless of when the NtK was delivered.

Further, NCP don't claim anywhere that they are using POFA, so I don't think the "complaint" letter is worded appropriately. That letter seems to claim they are using POFA to hold the keeper liable, but it doesn't. All they are saying is pay up (on the driver's behalf) or tell us who the driver was. If they later try to say the keeper is actually liable, only then do you have something to complain about.
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Re: Debt Recovery Letter from TRACE (NCP Gatwick)
« Reply #5 on: »
True. I didn't even look at the location. My bad. Still, here's a slightly adjusted letter you can send, if you've not already sent the other one. Won't make much difference though.

Quote
Subject: Formal Complaint and Challenge to Keeper Liability – PCN [Insert Reference Number]

Dear Sir/Madam,

I write as the Registered Keeper of the vehicle with registration number [INSERT REG] in relation to the above-referenced Parking Charge Notice (PCN), which I only recently became aware of following a letter from Trace Debt Recovery sent to my current address.

Upon investigation, I discovered that the original Notice was sent to a former address where I no longer reside. That address remains on the vehicle’s V5C due to an administrative oversight, although my relatives still live there. The notice was only recently retrieved and had been previously overlooked.

Regardless, I note that the location in question — Gatwick Airport — is not classified as “relevant land” under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. As such, you are unable to rely on PoFA to hold me liable as the Registered Keeper. I will not be naming the driver, and you have no lawful basis to pursue me for this charge.

This letter also constitutes a formal complaint regarding your inappropriate escalation of this matter to a debt recovery agency without first ensuring proper service of the original notice or verifying the legal basis for pursuing the Keeper. I expect this complaint to be handled in accordance with your published complaints procedure.

Separately, I will be submitting a Data Rectification Notice under Article 16 of the UK GDPR to update my address for service and require that you erase the former address from your records under Article 17(1)(d), as it is no longer accurate or necessary for processing.

Please confirm cancellation of this PCN and provide a written response to this complaint within 14 days.

Yours faithfully,

[Your Full Name]
[Current Address]
[Email Address – optional]
[Date]
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain

Re: Debt Recovery Letter from TRACE (NCP Gatwick)
« Reply #6 on: »
@b789
Sorry. I switched off and didn't read your last message but i had already sent the template off by then.

Re: Debt Recovery Letter from TRACE (NCP Gatwick)
« Reply #7 on: »
I haven't received any replies to the 2 x emails i sent to NCP, but have receieved an a "letter before claim" letter from Moorside Legal. I'll post it here very shortly.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2025, 11:27:06 am by bigred247 »

Re: Debt Recovery Letter from TRACE (NCP Gatwick)
« Reply #8 on: »
'Letter before claim' received from Moorside Legal

Any advice on how i should deal with this?




Re: Debt Recovery Letter from TRACE (NCP Gatwick)
« Reply #9 on: »
@b789
I've just seen you comment in the message below for a similar case. Am i safe to use this same email template and send it to help@moorsidelegal.co.uk and CC myself?

https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/letter-before-claim-moorside-legal-7650/msg85407/#msg85407

Re: Debt Recovery Letter from TRACE (NCP Gatwick)
« Reply #10 on: »
Yes, you can use that to respond to the utter incompetents at Moorside Legal.

More importantly, you say you have had no response to the complaint emails you sent to NCP. Which email address did you send them to? Did you CC yourself when you sent them? Have you tried copying and pasting the content of the complaint into NCP's "contact us" web portal? Just select "other" as the reason.
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain

Re: Debt Recovery Letter from TRACE (NCP Gatwick)
« Reply #11 on: »
@b789
I sent the formal complaint to customer.service@ncp.co.uk and data rectification email to dataprotection@ncp.co.uk and CC'd myself on both emails on 23.06.25. And I have followed up just now, copying and pasting the content of the complaint into NCP's "contact us" web portal (for both emails seperately).

Re: Debt Recovery Letter from TRACE (NCP Gatwick)
« Reply #12 on: »
I have just emailed those cowboys at moorside legal using the template previously linked. Just adding it here for reference. Sent to help@moorsidelegal.co.uk

Quote
Dear Sirs,

Your so-called “Letter Before Claim” is a masterclass in procedural non-compliance. It reads less like a legal document and more like a payday loan advert—complete with “friendly team” and “flexible payment plans.” Charming, but irrelevant.

Let me be clear: this is not a compliant Letter Before Claim under the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims. It fails to provide:

• The basis of the alleged claim (contract? tort? clairvoyance?)
• Any evidence whatsoever (no NtK, no signage, no landowner authority, no contract terms)
• A breakdown of the sum claimed (is the £170 damages, consideration, or just wishful thinking?)
• Copies of key documents relied upon

Your letter is devoid of substance, legal reasoning, and basic compliance. It does not enable informed dialogue, nor does it satisfy the requirements of paragraphs 3.1(a)–(d), 5.1, or 5.2 of the Protocol. It is procedurally defective and legally meaningless.

Should proceedings be issued on the back of this nonsense, 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.

Unless a compliant Letter Before Claim is issued, I will be referring this matter to the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) under Rule 1.4 and Rule 2.1 of the SRA Code of Conduct for Firms, on the basis that your conduct:

• Misrepresents the legal status of the claim
• Fails to uphold proper standards of legal service
• Demonstrates a lack of integrity and competence in pre-action procedure

Should your client issue proceedings based on this defective LoC, I will present it to the court as evidence of unreasonable conduct and procedural non-compliance. I will seek:

• An immediate stay under paragraph 15(b) of the Practice Direction
• A costs order under CPR 27.14(2)(g) for unreasonable behaviour
• Sanctions under paragraphs 13 and 16 of the Practice Direction

If your client wishes to pursue this matter, I suggest they instruct solicitors capable of drafting a compliant Letter of Claim. Until then, I am under no obligation to respond further.

Yours faithfully,

[Your name]

https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/letter-before-claim-moorside-legal-7650/msg85407/#msg85407

Re: Debt Recovery Letter from TRACE (NCP Gatwick)
« Reply #13 on: »
@b789

I have just received the below email from Moorside Legal. They also sent me a copy of the 'Parking Charge Notice to Keeper', the 'Final Reminder' and the 'Site Enforcement Pack - North Terminal'. I have linked the latter below.

Site Enforcement Pack - North Terminal
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1un9011EOQ1772NQVqGvW2sMq6_advH81/view?usp=sharing

If required, I can insert the 'Final Reminder' notice too? Per OP, both the 'Parking Charge Notice to Keeper' and 'Final Reminder' were sent to my former address, where my sister and mother currently live.


Quote
On Wed, Sep 3, 2025 at 9:24 AM <noreply@moorsidelegal.co.uk> wrote:

We write in relation to the above matter.

Please see the attatched, and the below.

1. An explanation of the cause of action
Our client has instructed us to collect the outstanding balance of £170.00 in relation to an unpaid Parking Charge Notice.

2. If the claim is for a contractual breach, photographs showing the vehicle was parked in contravention of said contract.
Please see the attached images.

3. Am I to understand that the additional £70 represents what is dressed up as a 'Debt Recovery' fee, and if so, is this net or inclusive of VAT? If the latter, would you kindly explain why I am being asked to pay the operator’s VAT?

The additional charge which has been levied on your Parking Charge of £70 is the amount set out in both the British Parking Association and International Parking Community 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 the International Parking Community which is a government approved Accredited Trade Association (ATA) for Private Parking. Our Client adheres to the ATA’s Code of Practice. The £70 does not represent the cost of recovery but is a reasonable amount in relation to the Parking Charge amount, in order to encourage early payment of the Parking Charge without the need for debt recovery. It is a fair amount set by our Client’s government-approved Accredited Trade Association Code of Practice. There are however also costs incurred by our client in relation to debt recovery services.

3b. With regard to the principal alleged PCN sum: Is this damages, or will it be pleaded as consideration for parking?

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 at the entrance and in prominent places within the car park. Due to your failure to comply with the terms and conditions, our client has issued the PCN therefore if we are instructed to issue a claim the reason would be for Unpaid parking charges/ breach of contract.

4. 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).

It is unclear why you would need to inspect any agreement between our client and the landowner as you are not party to that agreement, not could it aid your dispute or any potential defence.

The terms and conditions were clearly displayed in and around our client's private premises. When remaining on the premises, all motorists must choose to abide by them. However, on this occasion you failed to do so.

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 portal
https://pay.moorside.legal - Quick Pay
 Please note that we will not be addressing any further correspondence related to disputes of the same nature, as we have already provided you with a response. However, should you wish to raise a new dispute, we will investigate the matter further and respond accordingly.

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

 


Re: Debt Recovery Letter from TRACE (NCP Gatwick)
« Reply #14 on: »
Two things you can do now. First, send the following response to the utter incompetents at Moorside and CC yourself:

Quote
Subject: Your defective pre-action conduct and pursuit of a non-liable keeper – PCN [REF]

Dear Sirs,

I refer to your email of 3 September 2025 enclosing a copy NtK, Final Reminder and a “Site Enforcement Pack – North Terminal”.

First, record this timeline:

• 24 June 2025: I sent NCP (a) a formal complaint and (b) a Data Rectification Notice requiring correction of my address for service and erasure of the former address.

• By 26 August 2025: No response to either.

• Instead, I received your purported Letter of Claim and, on 3 September, your follow-up email.

That failure to respond to a data rights request within one calendar month is a breach of UK GDPR requirements, and no extension was sought or justified. Your client remains in default.

Second, you are pursuing the registered keeper for an event at Gatwick Airport, land subject to statutory byelaws. Airport land is not “relevant land” under Schedule 4 PoFA 2012, so keeper liability cannot arise. The driver has not been identified and will not be. Your “Site Enforcement Pack” does nothing to alter the statutory position; it merely confirms that the site is under statutory control. Continuing to threaten proceedings against the keeper in these circumstances is misconceived.

Third, your Letter of Claim is not compliant with the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims. Among other defects, it failed to provide the required particulars and documents, including the detailed basis of claim and the Information Sheet, Reply Form and Standard Financial Statement. Your 3 September email still fails to remedy these omissions.

Fourth, your justification for the £70 add-on relies on trade association lore, not law. The small claims track routinely treats such add-ons as unrecoverable double recovery, and Beavis does not licence bolt-ons to a core parking sum. If you intend to plead it, put me to strict proof now with a pleaded legal basis and authority—otherwise remove it.

Given the above:

Cease and desist from pursuing the keeper. Confirm in writing within 14 days that the matter is closed.

Alternatively, if you persist, issue a fully compliant Letter of Claim and place the matter on hold while NCP:

(a) serves a substantive complaint response, and
(b) confirms compliance with my Data Rectification Notice (address updated; former address erased).

Any proceedings issued now will be met with an application to stay for pre-action non-compliance and a costsrequest for unreasonable conduct.

Finally, I am filing a complaint to the SRA. Your correspondence misstates the legal position on liability and add-ons, refuses to engage with protocol duties, and ignores data protection obligations. If you cannot grasp these basics, pass the file to solicitors who can.

Yours faithfully,

[Full name]
[Current address]
[Email / phone]
[PCN ref | VRM]

Second, send the following complaint about Moorside to the SRA at reports@sra.org.uk and CC in Moorside and yourself:


Quote
Subject: Moorside Legal – Defective pre-action conduct, misleading assertions, and pursuit of non-liable keeper (private parking claim)

Dear SRA,

I wish to report Moorside Legal for conduct falling below the standards in the SRA Code of Conduct for Firms and the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (PAPDC).

Matter: Private parking claim for an alleged contravention at Gatwick Airport (PCN ref [REF]). I am the registered keeper; the driver has not been identified.

Key concerns:

Keeper liability misrepresented: Gatwick Airport is subject to airport byelaws and is not “relevant land” under Schedule 4 PoFA 2012. Moorside continue to threaten proceedings against the keeper notwithstanding this, and supplied a “Site Enforcement Pack” which merely confirms statutory control.

Non-compliant Letter of Claim: Their LoC omitted the PAPDC-mandated particulars and documents (including the Information Sheet, Reply Form and Standard Financial Statement) and failed to provide a proper basis of claim and document set.

Misleading add-on: They assert an additional £70 based on trade association codes as if that sum were lawfully recoverable.

Data protection failings: On 24 June 2025 I sent NCP a formal complaint and a Data Rectification Notice to correct my address and erase the former address. No response was provided by 26 August 2025. Moorside pressed on with an LoC regardless, rather than ensuring their client complied with data rights and basic complaint handling.

Why this engages SRA standards:

Code for Firms 1.4 (Maintaining trust): Do not mislead clients, the court or others. Their letters and email misstate liability under PoFA and present the £70 add-on as lawfully due.

Code for Firms 2.1 (Compliance and business systems): Ensure effective systems to comply with legal and regulatory requirements, including pre-action protocols and data protection. Their approach disregards PAPDC content requirements and fails to ensure their client addressed data rights before escalation.

Pre-Action compliance: Their LoC and follow-up do not meet PAPDC para 3.1 (content and enclosures) and fall foul of PD-PAC paras 13–16 (sanctions for non-compliance).

Evidence available (and supplied on request):

My emails to NCP dated 24 June 2025 (formal complaint and Data Rectification Notice).

Moorside’s Letter of Claim and their email of 3 September 2025 (with NtK, Final Reminder, and “Site Enforcement Pack”).

Proof of no reply from NCP by 26 August 2025.

Gatwick Byelaws extract and PoFA references confirming non-relevant land status.

I ask the SRA to consider whether Moorside Legal’s conduct breaches Code 1.4 and 2.1, and to take appropriate regulatory action or require remedial steps.

Please acknowledge and let me know if you require the documents referenced above.

Yours faithfully,

[Full name]
[Postal address]
[Email / phone]
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Like Like x 1 View List