Do as suggested write keep a digital copy of the letter and post it at Post office and get a free proof of posting take a picture of that as well and file it safely

Royal nail second class free proof of posting from post office, that's evidence you sent it and they can't dispue it later.

Why the police are not knocking on those Politicians and executives doors is beyond me.

Superb result well done.

Personally I wouldn't dig too deep with that one you have plenty with the Loading v parking and Jopson see what the others think but digressing down that way might not be worth the time./

2. Re their point 4-The claimant suggests the dropping off the cycles is a privilege that should have been paid for ? The defendant asserts that loading/ unloading is a regular activity carried out millions of times a day across the UK on public and private land and would challenge the claimant to proof of how many of these activities attract a fee for the privilege. The contract between the landowner and OPS clearly state that loading is an accepted activity which dies not require a ticket and that those doing so should not be issued a fine. Its unheard of to pay to unload or deliver A small van courier on multidrop could do exactly the same as you and they would have to pay to deliver to the cycle shop if there is no other loading bay access given their reasoning, so they are clutching at straws.

You send them one more email telling them you are not acccepting any emails or legal correspondence from them from now on, back it up by sending a letter and get free proof of posting from the Post Office.

Well done

Post Office executives who sat on i the evidence are guilty of perverting the course of justice for continuing prosecutions in full knowledge the Horizon was seriously borked.

They would be silly to escalate this to court, you paid they had no loss as FTMDave says legally its de minimis, a trifle will be more strident letters threatening eveything from the plagues of Egypt to a CCJ, whuich they can't get without taking you to court, so as others say ignore until a letter of claim, but save your payment evidence safely as they have 6 years to actually issue a claim, have neen some claims from fleecers for invoices 3 or 4 years since the alleged incident.

Might be a eay needs thought as you always had the right to unload, the seeking of your details breached GDP{R, as there was no ground to chase a tenant unloading. See wgahat the other's think, but well done, and bask in the knowledge they have lost more than the judgment sum, they have lost out on loadsa dosh in bailiff and Enforcement fees they were hoping to scalp from you. You beat the Can't Pay We'll take It Away clownshow.

Good luck

Superb Well Done, maccy "D" would not have liked any negative publicity coming their way if this continued.

That is now enough to hang therm out to dry if they do do the backdoor claim they seem to be contemplating.

Just sit on hands for now as advised. They are up the creek without knowing who is driver.

They could well be having a bombardment of emails due to others being invoiced by the egregious parking eye one hour way too short for a full weekly or monthly shop. As an aside local to me Aldi, different firm same family, has closed for refurbishment, they put some plant machinery in early and vans, Contractor told me they have loads of bother with PE over overstays when doing work on various sites even when vans are whitelisted as authorised. ,

@cuckooflower, OP says is Type 2 As to a counterclaim, this has gone nowhere near a court as yet we would not recommend a Counterclaim if they are silly enoughto issue a Claimform on this one. Provisions of the DDA might come in as a defence on an AOS or at WS stage. .Its with Fleecer' and likely Paper Tiger DCA.

Assisting in RAISING the blood sugar levels I think it is otherwise all good with FTMDave's edits.

If its a genuine emergency medicasl or mechanical, the contract should automatically be frustrated and impossible to be formed but if the did go to court here, I can't see many judges giving sympathy to the fleecers's I mean they would ticket the ambulance that arrived at a Maccu D if it was there attending an emergency probably.

Well done but if you had focused on the issues it might have been sorted sooner, however given the difficulty of obtaining proof of permission to load and unload, you still had Homeguard V Jopson but on its own was not sufficient for the fleecer's or DCBL, had you had the Claimform, Jopson still likely would have scuttled them. However they have had a bigger shock to their greed system this way, as they were salivating over all the fees etc. UKPC have been in trouble before for dodgy claims though. Make sure you turn up for that hearing.

Would be great if was a picture of her stopped in the no stopping.

DX suggesttion is good could also include that had that been a taxi driver stopping an invoice would be sent by VCS so you have the oxymoron where VCS stopping in breach of what they invoice other drivers for,

If you could put it up as PDF would be good, that of itself should be most helpful.

One thing in your favour is you have not outed who was driving, they know that from your email, might be useful further down the line.

Well there for the umpteenth time is one of the reasons you have a good defence to the original claim so long as you are granted the Set Aside, you need to stop faffing around Focus On The Job In hand.