Free Traffic Legal Advice

LBC from April 24 but only received 28/7/25?
Can you be more precise, are there two separate letters? OK, I think you mean PCN from April 24. Can you post here? Can you un-redact dates from everything?

Do you still have the original PPN?

If so, as stated post up a copy with personal details redacted but leave dates.

Just email the following too the dipsticks at Moorside at help@moorsidelegal.co.uk and CC yourself:

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.

As a firm of supposed solicitors, one would expect you to be capable of crafting a letter that aligns with paragraphs 3.1(a)–(d), 5.1 and 5.2 of the Protocol, and paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction. These provisions do not exist for decoration—they exist to facilitate informed discussion and proportionate resolution. You might wish to reacquaint yourselves with them.

The Civil Procedure Rules 1998, Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols (Part 3), stipulate that prior to proceedings, parties should have exchanged sufficient information to understand each other’s position. Part 6 helpfully clarifies that this includes disclosure of key documents relevant to the issues in dispute.

Your template letter mentions a “contract”, yet fails to provide one. This would appear to undermine the only foundation upon which your client’s claim allegedly rests. It’s difficult to engage in meaningful pre-litigation dialogue when your side declines to furnish the very document it purports to enforce.

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:

1. A copy of the original Notice to Keeper (NtK) that confirms any PoFA 2012 liability
2. A copy of the contract (or contracts) you allege exists between your client and the driver, in the form of an actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date, not a generic stock image
3. The exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions of the contract(s) which is (are) relied upon that you allege to have been breached
4. A copy of the original Notice To Keeper (NtK) as it was never received
5. The written agreement between your client and the landowner, establishing authority to enforce
6. A breakdown of the charges claimed, identifying whether the principal sum is claimed as consideration or damages, and whether the £70 “debt recovery” fee includes VAT

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]

Morning folks, I got a response...wondering what to do next?

"We write in relation to the above matter, please see the attatched as requested.
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.
 
 
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.
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.

 

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
 
 
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"

I'm not sure what I expected to hear back, but I don't think it was this. They supplied a bunch of attachments as well, as requested.

Thank you for your help so far.

Respond by email and CC yourself with the following:

Subject: Your email dated [insert date] – non-compliant response to Letter of Claim ([your ref])

Dear Sirs,

Your email of [insert date] is not a compliant response under the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (“PAPDC”). Directing me to a third-party “customer portal” does not discharge your obligations. You must provide the requested documents by ordinary means (email attachment or post). I will not register with, or accept service via, your portal.

For the avoidance of doubt:

1. Portal-only is improper. PAPDC para 5.1 requires you to provide documents and information upon request. Relegating disclosure to a gated portal is not compliance and is not good service. Please send the documents by return, attached to email or by post.
2. Your seven-day payment demand is untenable. The PAPDC prescribes 30 days for considered engagement, running from receipt of a compliant Letter of Claim and the provision of the documents reasonably requested. Your truncated deadline is ignored.
3. Outstanding documents (first requested 4 August 2025) – still not received by email/post:

• Signage evidence: contemporaneous photographs as displayed on the material date, including wording, placement, illumination, and driver-eye legibility.
• Exact clause(s) allegedly breached on the signs/terms relied upon.
• Landowner authority: the written agreement conferring authority to operate, issue PCNs, and litigate in your client’s name.
• Full quantum breakdown identifying whether the principal sum is claimed as consideration or damages and the basis (if any) for the £70 add-on, including whether VAT is applicable.
• PoFA 2012 compliance: the Notice to Keeper and all documents relied upon, including the specified period of parking required by paragraph 9(2)(a).

4. The £70 “debt recovery” add-on. You are already on notice that such uplifts are routinely found irrecoverable and an abuse of process in parking claims. Any attempt to rely on it will be opposed and may attract costs consequences.
5. Next steps. Until you comply fully with PAPDC paras 3.1(a)–(d), 5.1 and 6(a)–(c) by serving the above documents by email or post, pre-action engagement is not complete. If you issue prematurely, I will seek an immediate stay and invite the court to impose sanctions under the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols, including paragraphs 13, 15(b) and 16. I also reserve the right to refer your conduct to the SRA under Principles 1, 2 and 5.

Please provide the documents within 7 days by email attachment (PDF) or post. I will not access your portal.

Yours faithfully,

[Your Name]

Not directly, no.

Has the OP revealed the identity of "the driver" on the date of the alleged "offence"?