Free Traffic Legal Advice

You have not shown the LoC, only the reminder that the 30 days expired yesterday. Not much you can do for now except to wait for the N1SDT Claim Form pack to arrive from the CNBC. You will then have a choice of whether to use the MSE or our advice on how to defend the claim.

Without having seen the Notice to Keeper (NtK) it is difficult to give much more advice on the matter for now. Based solely on the evidence you have provided of the sign at the location, assuming the NtK was an invoice for an alleged breach of contract by the driver, I cannot see how any contract could have been formed with that signage.

You would have a good defence because the law of contract needs an offer you can accept. A sign saying “NO PARKING IN THIS AREA AT ANY TIME” is not an offer at all. It is a prohibition. You can’t accept a prohibition, so no contract ever comes into existence and there can be no “breach of contract” charge.

Adding “Parking charge £100” doesn’t change that. It reads as a deterrent attached to a ban, not as a price term of a licence to park. Without a licence being offered, there is nothing to accept and no consideration moves between the parties. Contractual liability fails at the starting gate.

If anything, parking despite a prohibition is trespass. Only the landowner can sue for trespass, and only for their actual loss, which is usually nominal. Most parking companies aren’t the landowner and don’t have standing to claim trespass damages, and in any event those damages would not be a fixed £100.

The Supreme Court’s ParkingEye v Beavis case doesn’t save them. Beavis involved a valid contractual licence to park with a charge as a term of that licence. Here there is no licence at all, so the Beavis reasoning on a commercial justification for a high charge does not apply.

Judges often decide simple small claims on simple grounds. “No contract because the sign forbids parking” is a clear, easily understood point.

Have you responded to the LoC at all?

Good that you have not responded. They have no idea who the driver is and only the driver can be liable because that Notice to Keeper (NtK) is not compliant with PoFA para 9(2)(a) as there is no period of parking noted on the notice. A single timestamp is not a "period" of parking. There is no evidence that any contract was formed with the unknown (to them) driver.

Also, the PCN is for "no parking". As this is a contractual dispute, a "Mo parking" sign cannot form a contract.

If this actually goes to court, there is plenty persuasive appellate court decisions such as Brennan v Premier Parking Solutions (2023) [H6DP632H], Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking (CA, [1971] 2 QB 163), Vine v Waltham Forest (CA, [2000] EWCA Civ 106) to name a few.

As no claim has yet been issued, upload the following as a PDF letter to BW Legal using their web portal:

Quote

Subject: Response to your Letter of Claim Ref: [reference number]

Dear Sirs,

Your Letter Before Claim contains insufficient detail of the claim and fails to provide copies of the evidence your client places reliance upon, putting it in clear breach of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims.

As a supposed firm of solicitors, one would expect you to comply 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 exist to facilitate informed discussion and proportionate resolution. You may wish to reacquaint yourselves with them.

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

Your template letter refers to a “contract” yet encloses none. That omission undermines the only foundation upon which your client’s claim allegedly rests. It is not possible to engage in meaningful pre-litigation dialogue while you decline to furnish the very document you purport to enforce.

I confirm that, once I am in receipt of a Letter Before Claim that complies with para 3.1(a), I shall seek advice and submit a formal response within 30 days, as required. Accordingly, please provide:

1. A copy of the original Notice to Keeper (NtK) and any notice chain relied upon to assert PoFA 2012 liability.

2. A copy of the contract you allege exists between your client and the driver, being an actual photograph of the sign(s) in place on the material date (not a stock image), together with a site plan showing the sign locations.

3. The precise wording of the clause(s) allegedly breached.

4. The written agreement between your client and the landowner evidencing standing/authority to enforce and to litigate.

5. A breakdown of the sums claimed, identifying whether the principal sum is claimed as consideration or damages, and whether the £70 “debt recovery” add-on includes VAT.


I am entitled to this information under paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction, and I require it to meet my own obligation under paragraph 6(b).

If you fail to provide the above, I will treat that as non-compliance with the PAPDC and Pre-Action Conduct and will raise a formal complaint to the SRA regarding your conduct. I reserve the right to place this correspondence before the Court and to seek appropriate sanctions and costs (including, where appropriate, a stay and/or other case management orders).

Until your client complies and provides the requested material, I am unable to respond properly to the alleged claim or to consider my position. It would be premature and a waste of costs and court time to issue proceedings. Should you do so, I will seek immediate case management relief pursuant to paragraph 15(b) of the Practice Direction and an order compelling provision of the above.

Please note, I will not engage with any web portal; I will only respond by email or post.

Yours faithfully,

[Your name]

Have they provided you with any close up photos of the signs? If so, please provide a copy.

You have already received an LoC. You are now waiting for the actual claim to arrive.

An amended LoC can be submitted.