5 year old claim!!!

Umkomaas · 12 September 2016 at 4:25PM

As I said in my previous post, you are at the serious end of this business now. You should be keeping tabs on this thread regularly.

I also said you need to engage with BWL (because it's more likely that those who do not will be picked off first with the issuing of court papers). I really don't know why you ignored the advice I gave and even provided you the letter to send.

Burying your head in the sand will not make this go away.

legranfromage · 13 September 2016 at 12:34PM

Thanks Umkomaas. No burying of head in sand here and advice now been well and truly heeded.
Letter has now gone in the post and I will wait to see what happens next
Please don't feel your advice has gone unheard - as I mentioned, there was a mix up with me receiving messages.
However, you are right, and I will keep a constant watch on this, and other posts
Thanks again for all your advice - this really is an invaluable forum especially for those intimidated and unnerved by these people

Fruitcake · 13 September 2016 at 12:45PM

legranfromage wrote: »

Thanks Umkomaas. No burying of head in sand here and advice now been well and truly heeded.
Letter has now gone in the post and I will wait to see what happens next
Please don't feel your advice has gone unheard - as I mentioned, there was a mix up with me receiving messages.
However, you are right, and I will keep a constant watch on this, and other posts
Thanks again for all your advice - this really is an invaluable forum especially for those intimidated and unnerved by these people

Did you send the letter first class from a Post Office and obtain a free proof of posting/ If not, do so now as otherwise they could deny that you sent it and you would have no proof.

Don't use special or recorded delivery for the same reason. (They can refuse to sign for at and thus have proof it wasn't received.

Coupon-mad · 13 September 2016 at 5:32PM

legranfromage wrote: »

Thanks Umkomaas. No burying of head in sand here and advice now been well and truly heeded.
Letter has now gone in the post and I will wait to see what happens next
Please don't feel your advice has gone unheard - as I mentioned, there was a mix up with me receiving messages.
However, you are right, and I will keep a constant watch on this, and other posts
Thanks again for all your advice - this really is an invaluable forum especially for those intimidated and unnerved by these people

Why not tell Theresa May and Sir Oliver Heald how intimidated and unnerved you feel after 5 years of this baseless 'charge' now being resurrected, as suggested in this threads below? Now is the time to complain to the top, seeing as the Government are looking to be waking up to this scam.

Ask them why it is fair that you have such a threat hanging over you, which could affect your credit through no fault of yours and based upon no 'credit' or CCA matter at all, not a real debt at all. Make it clear this is about a false, baseless made-up charge by a notorious ex-clamping firm owned by 'Captain Clampit' (the earlier nickname of the now rich fat cat Simon Renshaw-Smith, of BPA board fame). Tell them that VCS and Excel are now on a feeding frenzy, with THOUSANDS of template claims sent to people's old addresses after 5 or even 6 years, courtesy of BW Legal's 'roboclaims' (BW Legal being a firm known to currently be under some level of investigation by both the SRA and the CSA):

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5524754

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=71294781#post71294781

Go for it. Strike now. I suggest letters sent snail mail so they pile up on someone's desk, again and again, ready for when Parliament returns from recess/conferences.

legranfromage · 6 October 2016 at 10:21AM

Hi - following the previous advise, I sent the Gan letter and obtained free proof of postage.
Earlier this week I received a reply from BW Legal, stating the following:
We refer to your letter dated......, the contents of which have been noted.
We are responding to clarify our position
Our client does not rely on the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 therefore your points raised regarding this are irrelevant
Furthermore, our legal fees of £54.00 are reasonable for a professional law firm dealing in this type of legal work and payment of such fees was detailed in the terms and conditions ("Terms") located within the Car Park. As the fees were detailed in the Terms, they are deemed a contractual charge and thus you are liable to pay them
Our client is within the timeframe to issue County Court proceedings against you and we will now seek instructions from them to do so
We trust the above is satisfactory

Do I just sit and wait for the next letter from them? I am assuming there is very little else I can do now given my previous letter saying they would receive no further correspondence from me.

All advice and guidance much appreciated as always

Coupon-mad · 6 October 2016 at 10:36AM

No, do always reply. Look at other BW Legal threads (galore!).

Umkomaas · 6 October 2016 at 10:42AM

I'd keep the letter ping-pong going with them. I'd tell them that I want this finally settled and would they get on with issuing proceedings so that a Judge can deal with this as soon as possible.

The reply you've had is yet another template, seen a number of times previously.

I've quickly scanned over your posts, but don't see any mention of where this PCN was incurred. Was it an airport by chance? Please let us have an idea of the parking location.

The_Deep · 6 October 2016 at 10:50AM

Have you complained to the SRA? If not now is the time to do so.
Write to Duncan Allen, Head of Compliance, at

http://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/problems/report-solicitor.page

Specifically complain about the £54, any threats they have mane, any mention of Elliott v Loake, you were not/cannot remember who was driving, so it was unlikely that you agreed to the contract, which was probably unfair under UTCCC anyway.

They have no reason to assume that you were the driver, Elliott v Loake cannot be used as the case turned on the analysis of specks of paint found on the other motor vehicle. There is an excellent letter to these parasites on this thread, adapt it to the circumstances.

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=107836

Keep the ball in play, it costs them money,

beamerguy · 6 October 2016 at 11:13AM

legranfromage wrote: »

Hi - following the previous advise, I sent the Gan letter and obtained free proof of postage.
Earlier this week I received a reply from BW Legal, stating the following:
We refer to your letter dated......, the contents of which have been noted.
We are responding to clarify our position
Our client does not rely on the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 therefore your points raised regarding this are irrelevant
Furthermore, our legal fees of £54.00 are reasonable for a professional law firm dealing in this type of legal work and payment of such fees was detailed in the terms and conditions ("Terms") located within the Car Park. As the fees were detailed in the Terms, they are deemed a contractual charge and thus you are liable to pay them
Our client is within the timeframe to issue County Court proceedings against you and we will now seek instructions from them to do so
We trust the above is satisfactory

Do I just sit and wait for the next letter from them? I am assuming there is very little else I can do now given my previous letter saying they would receive no further correspondence from me.

All advice and guidance much appreciated as always

It is difficult to understand where this lot come from

THEY SAY
"Our client does not rely on the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 therefore your points raised regarding this are irrelevant"

That statement is in itself irrelevant as this refers to 2011 which is PRE POFA 2012 so who cares if their client does not reply on POFA2012 ????

As said in a previous post, the letters you have been receiving up to the last one were clearly debt collector style as they are now saying to you "they will now seek their clients instructions"

This misleading information and continued harassment by BWLegal must be reported to the SRA .... URGENTLY

In the meantime reply to BWLegal stating that their mention of POFA2012 is irrelevant as the claim relates to 2011
Point out that you find their correspondence harassing and therefore you have issued a complaint to the SRA and until a suitable reply is received from the SRA, the matter is on hold

legranfromage · 6 October 2016 at 11:39AM

Perfect - thanks all for such prompt responses. I will have a thorough read of all the links and advice and put something together. I will also log a complaint with SRA as advised.
Really appreciate this help - much appreciated

5 year old claim!!!

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free