What does annoy me about this is that less than a month after this supposed ticket they agreed with the gym that no tickets should be given after ten.

The only thing which is really worrying me is if it went to court as I’m no good at that type of thing. Get deployed in the past no problem but standing up in court .

I understand that but as I’ve said earlier things have changed somewhat since I last had to do one of these and I’m trying to play catch up so any/all help and advice is gratefully received.

It’s in all the previous letters from them and their clients.

I know, it's changed so much since I've had to do this.

Date of letter is 15/05

Paploc?

I found this one which seems to the point, does it fit in with the letter they sent though? You state that I should consider this to be a letter before action or letter before claim. Unfortunately for you I cannot accept this shoddily thrown together piece of tripe to be a LBA as it fails miserably to come anywhere near a lba as required under the revised Civil Procedure Regulations and so would expect a court to summarily dismiss any claim later made by you or your client on that basis. However as you are the parking world third worst firm of solicitors I am not surprised you failed to put any effort into this taradiddle so to make sure that there is no misunderstanding I deny that any monies are owed to your client by myself as there is precedent case law that your clients greed has blindeed them to. The same applies to the inflated amount of the claim, the POFA and contract law are very clear on this point and again plenty of examples of dismissed claims are in the public domain. Your fondness for misquoting the decision of PE v Beavis makes it look like you have never read the full judgement but like the other rent a threats see it as a panacea for justifying any old coddswallop you care to trot out It would be wise if you took your obligations you signed up to when being entered onto the SRA roll and advised your clients it is not in their interests to continue with this matter as they have no cause for action and I shall seek a full costs recover order for any civil claim made under the unreasonableness criteria.

Sorry I must be a bit dense today as I can't find any snotty letters on the forums.

Had this one turn up today. Pretty sure it's just another threat rather than real intent but would like a second opinion. They keep stating they can ask for interest. I thought if it was under £3000 it was small claims and that wasn't allowed or has it changed? DCB(L) letter of claim.pdf

Had an unpaid debt reminder notice from a CST Law today. Apart from the usual 'Beavis V Parking Eye means you must pay us' nonsense they are telling me they can commence court action anytime within six years (hoping the law changes in their favour), they will ask for an increase of statutory costs and court fees (as it's small claims that is nonsense so I believe). And to finish off they ask me to keep Debt Recovery Plus up to date with my address so court papers can be sent as it's vital it's correct for the CCJ. I know this is a load of rubbish but should I keep it on the outside chance they do try and take it to court so the judge can see what levels they go to scare people into paying?

Well I got what is supposed to be my final letter today. Still got the same signs up at the car park which doesn't mention anywhere about out of hours parking. DRPredacted2 (1).pdf

Well I had the debt collectors letter today wanting money. And in the final paragraph of the letter there was a link https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2015-0116.html and saying this shows it's all lawful so you must pay. Is there more to this story than they are saying?

I’ll have a look when I go again and see if there is any variations in the signage.

Just this schedule four thing which I don’t really understand. Had tickets before but none with that on it. Does it change anything legally?