To be honest Rox you're the one putting in all the sterling work and I was hoping you'd help the others out, not vice versa! However, I've directed them to your thread.

When you have time, have a look at this thread https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/435620-g24-pcn-sports-direct-heathcote-rd-longton-stoke-on-trent-st3-2nu-not-paid-yet/page/2/?tab=comments#comment-5117764 The OP is in the same situation as you and is trying to dig up as much information as possible to sink the fleecers' case.

When you have time, have a look at this thread https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/435620-g24-pcn-sports-direct-heathcote-rd-longton-stoke-on-trent-st3-2nu-not-paid-yet/page/2/?tab=comments#comment-5117764 The OP is in the same situation as you and is trying to dig up as much information as possible to sink the fleecers' case.

Billy, are you the person PE are threatening to sue? All this - frankly ridiculous - Person A has to ask Person B to ask Person C means we're still in the dark over the most basic of matters.

Do not agree to the case being heard on the papers. If you do, Simon will simply send in a load of lies and you won't be able to counter them.

Please redact & upload what VCS sent you, just to be on the safe side. Their reply seems to be very good news, presumably the PCN is missing. If there are photos of the carp signage, please upload them too. This is not looking good for Simon Are you prepared to sue Excel for not replying to your SAR request?

On 20 May you wrote that you had sent the SARs. 20 May + 30 days + 2 days postage out + 2 days postage back = 23 June. Am I right? You did get proof of posting with Certificates of Posting, right? That means Simple Simon has refused to satisfy your SAR requests in the time required by law, and so you can sue him. I suspect you have had no reply because Simon doesn't want to admit the Excel/VCS mix-up. It could of course be incompetence/arrogance/laziness and I am coming up with 2+2=5, but I suspect not. So have a little think about what you want to do about this and then get back to us. IMO you should now send a Letter Before Claim to both VCS and Excel demanding they pay you £100 (?) for causing you distress by not replying to your SARs. However, the worst of the worst things you can do in legal dispute is to show yourself as a paper tiger. Threatening legal action then doing nothing is the worst own goal imaginable. If you do send an LBA, and if Simon doesn't answer, you have to sue on the first day after the deadline. Have a think about what you're prepared to do and let us know.

Write to Sports Direct in Stoke and ask. Excellent idea to contact the local paper. Well done on all this info. you're getting.

While nothing "bad" has happened to you or any of the other four motorists we have here in the same situation, it would still be better to err on the side of caution and build up some evidence to assist your case. In the first post you say a friend took you to the car park. It would be a very good idea to repeat this, take photos of the signs, and then as BF says in post 6, produce some sort of diagram showing which signs were there when you parked, and which weren't. I would also write to the shop and ask them when the new signs were put up. You say they told you about two months ago, it's important to get that in writing. I wrote to Sports Direct on FB to ask them for an e-mail address for the shop but they replied that it doesn't have one (yeah, right) so it'll have to be a snail mail letter I'm afraid. I would also e-mail the Sports Direct CEO again, saying you are surprised you haven't received the courtesy of a reply given you are a genuine customer, and saying that in case of legal action against you by G24 you will join Sports Direct to the action as a third party unless the invoice is immediately cancelled. It might get you nowhere, it may not even be Sports Direct's car park, but it's worth a shout. Also look up if G24 have planning permission for their signs. Any evidence you can get will help you and others in the same boat.

I'm just musing that there might be an easy way to sort this out. I know you've contacted the surgery, but presumably you got a member of staff on the phone who found it easier to say "no" than "yes". How about if your wife writes to the surgery, and points out - what happened and why she was emotional that day - that there is no sign at the entrance about controlled private parking which is completely against industry standards, meaning that even if someone read the tiny signs inside the car park by then it would be too late to avoid the £100 charge (yes, there is a grace period, but they won't know that) - that the whole set up seems to favour PE being able to issue the £100 invoices rather than for the car park to be properly managed - that it was the surgery that called in PE, they are legally responsible for this mess - that you will add the surgery to any court action against you by PE - that all this unpleasantness can be avoided if the surgery simply tells PE to cancel the charge. Now you might get absolutely nowhere, but it's only a stamp, getting nasty often gets results, nothing ventured ...

As you say, the signage is appalling, and will sink PE. Well done on getting this evidence. Simply ignore their attempts to destroy the Amazon from now on - but obviously come here if they try a Letter Before Action/Letter Before Claim. BTW, your personal details show up on DOCX files, so I've deleted them and replaced with PDF.

It doesn't work like that I'm afraid. It will never be "voided" because the private parking companies never admit to being in the wrong. On the other hand they're not the police or the council, they're a private company. Simply ignore them. The only person who can force you to pay this is a judge after you've lost a court case. That's why we say to ignore them - but come back here if you get a Letter Before Action/Letter Before Claim.

Don't worry, the fleecers have to give you 30 days to reply to a LBA, so if by some freak the letter arrived five minutes after you left, you'd still have time to answer when you got back. None of the other motorists we have here in a similar position to yours have received a LBA yet.

@bolmgsrlookinforinfo's work can be added to para (7) or put in a new paragraph immediately after (7). Split the bye-laws from para (6) and give them their own section, the bye-laws are one of your aces. @brassneckedI've never seen a case where someone has sued to get the money back they'd paid on a PCN. They fact they had agreed to pay would be problematic, although it could be argued that they had been conned by Simon pretending he had authority to manage the area. Another area of attack could be GDPR, because here Simon has issued a PCN stating the OP was in a place they clearly weren't, even by Simon's photos, and VCS have told lie after lie about the petrol station while knowing all the while there was no basis to the PCN. I suppose we'll have to see if the OP wins and the reasons the judge gives.

So what do you think the fleecers reckon you did wrong? The rubbish on their invoice says "Vehicle not registered" whatever the hell that means.

OK, I've tweaked things just a little bit (the odd typo, the odd word changed to make it flow better, etc). However, I've moved the paragraphs around and given each section a heading to try to make your legal arguments clearer. There may be more formal ways to phrase the headings, see what the other regulars think. You'll have to change the exhibit numbers. I've added a paragraph 16 in red saying Simon is claiming £50 legal costs yet he is representing himself (with an extra exhibit). I think paragraph 6 needs to be split into two, RTA and bye-laws, and you need to lay it on thick about the bye-laws. Indeed give the bye-laws their own section. Apologies if I've knackered the lay-out! However, see what the others think too. WS version 3.pdf

That's great work - well done. From a first quick glance there's nothing "wrong" there - however some of the paragraphs need moving round to make the legal arguments flow more clearly. If no-one looks in this evening I'll do it tomorrow.

These motorists are in the same position. Absolutely nothing bad has happened to them (apart from receiving the usual "threatening" letters). https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/435477-g24-anpr-pcn-sports-direct-matalan-heathcote-road-longton-stoke-on-trent-st3/?tab=comments#comment-5113545 https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/432744-g24-pcn-no-permit-sports-direct-matalan heathcote-road-longton-stoke-on-trent-st3-voluntary-73yrs-old-nhs-responder/?tab=comments#comment-5099203 https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/434356-g24-anpr-pcn-no-permit-only-1hrs-free-parking-sports-direct-matalan heathcote-road-longton-stoke-on-trent-st3-worth-appealing/?tab=comments#comment-5107740

Good to see Sports Direct ... treating their customers with complete contempt. Normally I would suggest getting nasty and threatening to join them as a third party to any court action if they don't get the invoice cancelled - but the problem is we still don't know if it's Sport's Direct's own car park. Might be worth a try I suppose.

It's not Trace's debt so they can do nothing. Hot air from paper tigers. What was the response from Sports Direct's CEO's office?

The last two paragraphs especially sink Simon ....

Subject Access Request. Completely free. Will force the fleecers to disclose the data they have on you. Simply clink on the SAR link and follow the instructions. When you send it tomorrow, put in a photocopy of some I.D. & proof of address so the fleecers have no excuse to procrastinate. Have you got onto the DVLA as lookinforinfo suggested in post 16?

Absolutely not. The whole point of a snotty letter is to show you have sussed their money-making schemes and would be big trouble in court if they went ahead. You should ridicule their procedures.

Quickly, and it's anything but perfect given the rush, but how about - Dear Rachael and Sean, cheers for your Letter of Claim. I creased up at the thought that you reckon a motorist would actually take such bilge seriously and would really actually cough up. As usual you've done no due diligence otherwise you would have known that a claim for parking at the Brighton Road Retail Park would just lead to a good kicking in court for your clients. Your greedy money-grabbing clients have of course stuck in £54 Unicorn Food Tax. Dear dear. Bad own goal. I very much doubt a judge would be very impressed. Your clients can either drop this nonsense now or get a hammering in court where I will go for a unreasonable costs order under CPR 27.14(2)(g) and then spend it all on a foreign holiday after borders reopen while laughing at your clients' expense. I look forward to your deafening silence. COPIED TO TOTAL PARKING SOLUTIONS If none of the other regulars have comments, post the letter tomorrow to both BW Legal and TPS, send 1st class, and get two free Certificates of Posting. I've had to leave it generic because, I presume, you haven't really looked into the Brighton Road Retail Park car park situation, and as dx says you need to move. Don't just rely on the snotty letter. Have TPS got planning permission for their signs? Did the original planning permission for the retail park really state only two hours? What about photos of the signage? - I know the place is a long way from you but scour the web and Google Earth and see if you have any luck.