Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • mowkid
    • By mowkid 19th Sep 16, 12:59 PM
    • 39Posts
    • 51Thanks
    mowkid
    Excel/bw chasing my wifes carer
    • #1
    • 19th Sep 16, 12:59 PM
    Excel/bw chasing my wifes carer 19th Sep 16 at 12:59 PM
    On 8th June 2011 a lady who is a carer for my wife received a PCN from Excel. Following the prevailing advice at the time she sent a letter to Excel telling them that they needed to establish who was the driver
    Evetually it went to Rossendale and in 2015 she received a notification intimating that they had handed the claim back to Excel.
    On the 25 July this year it all started up again with a letter from bwlegal.
    Foolishly perhaps I offered to help her as best I could with letter/emails etc as she has no access to a computer or experience of same.
    She has received all the standard letters from bwlegal to which I have written replies for her using advice and tips from this forum. They have come up eith the usual stuff, claiming the £54 fee, Elliot V Loake and so on.
    I have sent a complsint to the SRA using tips from this forum but no offical reply yet. She did 'phone them this morning to get a state of play and the said sometime tis week. At the same time she did slip in a question as to whether they had a number of complaints re bwlegal and they said no they hadn't. ( maybe that was a white lie to save confidentiality)
    She is now in panic mode because she has received a letter headed LETTER OF CLAIM giving her until 29/9/2016 to pay up and caliming that they have no response from her to their letter of 25th July when in fact they refer to one of them in a letter dated 24th August. This latest letter contains a table of costs totalling£272.15 they claim she would be made to pay if the matter whent to County Court

    This is the latest. Hope if got it on in useable form bieng a bit of a computer dummy.

    Dear Madam
    LETTER OF CLAIM
    Our Client: Excel Parking Services Ltd Parking Charge Nonee (PCN): Camera
    Account Number: ~ 1 Date of Contravention: 8June 2011
    Vehicle Registration: 0 i Balance Due: £154.00
    Contravention Description: Parked for longer than maximum period permitted.
    Contravention Locatiou:~ @ J raaAnpr Charging Scbeme Std tU ~
    Further to our letter dated 25 July 2016 where we requested that you either pay the Balance in full or provide your
    detailed grounds for disputing the PCN, by 10 August 2016, we are yet to receive payment andlor a response to our
    letter.
    Please pay the Balance by 29 September 20 I6 to prevent legal action from being taken. For the avoidance of doubt
    tbe Balance relates to the £100.00 parking charge and £54.00 for our client's initial legal fees, which were detailed
    in the car park terms and conditions.
    County Court Proceedings
    As we have previously brought to your attention, in the event County Court proceedings are issued, we will be
    seeking recovery of not only the Balance but our client's court fees, further solicitor's costs and statutory interest
    which are estimated to be the following:
    ..
    [Principal Debt + Initial Legal Costs £154.00
    Estimated Interest £42.15
    Estimated Court Fees £25.00
    Estimated Solicitors Costs £50.00
    EstimatedTotaJ £2'iLlS::
    We also wish to bring to your attention the case of Parking Eye Limited v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 in which the
    Supreme Court held that parking charges serve a legitimate commercial interest and are neither extravagant nor
    unconscionable. This case eliminates the main defence that you may have should the matter go to Court and this
    case will be relied upon, by onr-olieat, in any County Court proceedings.
    You should also note that if your claim has already been processed through an Independent Appeal Service ("!AS")
    and an !AS has dismissed your appeal, then it is likely that a County Court will come to a similar conclusion and
    your defence will be unsuccessful.
    If our client successfully obtains a County Court Judgment ("CCJ") against you (which is likely), then a CCJ will
    be recorded on your credit file for 6 years unless you satisfy the CCJ in full within a month of the CCJ being
    entered. A CCJ on your credit file may .affectyour ability to obtain future credit and may affect your employability.
    If you fail to comply with the CCJ order we reserve the right to take one of the following enforcement actions to
    recover this debt:
    • Warrant of Control: A County Court Bailiff visiting you at your home,
    • Attachment of Earnings: Your employer may be ordered to deduct payments from your wages.
    • Order to Attend Court For Questioning: You being ordered to attend Court to disclose your fmancial
    circumstances.
    In allowing you the opportunity to make representations and/or pay the Balance before proceedings being
    issued, our Client has complied with the guidelines under the Independent Parking Committee Code of Practice
    (lithe Code") and its obligations under the Civil Procedure Rules ("CPR"). All previous correspondence in this
    matter will be brought to the attention of the Court should this point be raised.
    What You Need To Do Now
    To avoid proceedings being commenced and the above additional fees, costs and estimated interest being incurred,
    __ ..._ we !equest you pay J:.heBalance by 29 September ~O16~
    .-
    We have attached to this letter (once again) our "How to make payment" document, which details the ways in
    which you can pay the Balance. In the event we do not receive payment of the Balance by 29 September 2016, we
    place you on notice that we will commence legal proceedings for the recovery of the Balance without further
    notice.
    If you are unable to pay the Balance immediately, please Call us today on 0113 323 4479 to discuss this matter
    with one of our helpful team. Our team can set up an affordable payment arrangement for you that matches your
    current financial circumstances.
    Yours faithfully
    #j iR-fj'CN{
    BWLegal
Page 1
    • mowkid
    • By mowkid 19th Sep 16, 4:10 PM
    • 39 Posts
    • 51 Thanks
    mowkid
    • #2
    • 19th Sep 16, 4:10 PM
    • #2
    • 19th Sep 16, 4:10 PM
    Following my post this morning I've pretty much scoured this forum to see if anyone else had received the same letter from bw. I can't find one so I'm now wondering if its a standard letter or not.
    Ive knocked off a reply in an attempt to put them off for at least a bit longer.
    Trouble is they keep introducing more frighteners. They have put in Beavis now..
    Many people have viewed this thread, does anybody have a better suggestion?
    • Carthesis
    • By Carthesis 19th Sep 16, 4:44 PM
    • 84 Posts
    • 127 Thanks
    Carthesis
    • #3
    • 19th Sep 16, 4:44 PM
    • #3
    • 19th Sep 16, 4:44 PM
    The offence was pre-PoFA2012 I think?

    I therefore think I'm right in saying that they will have to establish who the driver was, and if they can't establish this, they won't get anywhere. Keeper Liability is a PoFA-thing, and if they want to apply PoFA to an incident that pre-dates it, they'll have to prove that everything they sent out was PoFA-compliant, which it probably won't be.

    Anyway, this isn't a Letter Before Claim. This is a Letter Before A Letter Before Claim. They're just trying it on some more. Beavis also applies only in very specific circumstances as far as my understanding goes - I believe it is that it has to be a car park offering free parking in a retail area, where the basis of the charge is that by parking there you're preventing another paying customer from being there, hence costing them money. They would also have to prove that, at the time, the signage was compliant with the standard in the Beavis case - i.e. the charge in big big letters. Given the date of the "offence", i'd be amazed if that was the case, as this was back in the Good Old Days when they could get away with murder.
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 19th Sep 16, 5:25 PM
    • 5,289 Posts
    • 3,839 Thanks
    The Deep
    • #4
    • 19th Sep 16, 5:25 PM
    • #4
    • 19th Sep 16, 5:25 PM
    IIMU that BWL are being investigated by the SRA for similar claims, of which there must be thousands.

    The £54 is a try on, not allowed by law. Copy the letter to the SRA complaining that they are attempting to obtain monies to which they have no entitlement and that such conduct is likely to bring the profession into disrepute.

    Also point out that Elliott v Loake was a criminal case and a conviction was obtained with the help of forensic evidence.

    Read this

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5509488


    also read Gan's letter to Miah here.


    http://www.pepipoo.com/forums/lofiversion/index.php/t98605.html
    Last edited by The Deep; 19-09-2016 at 5:30 PM.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • Fruitcake
    • By Fruitcake 19th Sep 16, 5:45 PM
    • 35,484 Posts
    • 71,544 Thanks
    Fruitcake
    • #5
    • 19th Sep 16, 5:45 PM
    • #5
    • 19th Sep 16, 5:45 PM
    There are far too many lies, and mistruths in that letter to list them all.

    It was pre POFA 2012 so they cannot pursue the keeper, only the driver. If they don't know who that is, they are stuffed.

    The IAS and IPC did not exist at the time of the alleged event.

    As the Deep says, Elliot vs Loake was proven by forensic evidence which does not exist here.
    They know they cannot claim the 54 quid legal costs in court, or interest on that amount.

    Keep playing rebuttal ping-pong with them. Point out the above, and other charges you know they can't claim such as estimate solicitors' and court costs. The court would decide this, not BW.

    Keep complaining to the SRA about them. They are trying to con you that this is a letter before claim by calling it a Letter of Claim. This is misrepresentation. Tell your wife's care not to panic and pay. Show her this thread and let her see that help is available.
    Last edited by Fruitcake; 19-09-2016 at 5:48 PM.
    I married my cousin. I had to...
    I don't have a sister.

    All my screwdrivers are cordless.
    "You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 19th Sep 16, 6:02 PM
    • 3,595 Posts
    • 3,983 Thanks
    beamerguy
    • #6
    • 19th Sep 16, 6:02 PM
    • #6
    • 19th Sep 16, 6:02 PM
    mowkid .... This is firm of solicitors who have gone mad
    The rubbish they spout is menacing and they lie.

    Send a copy of that letter to the SRA bitterly complaining about their menacing fabrication designed only to collect money from you.

    Advise BWLegal that you have issued a severe complaint to the SRA AND no further correspondence will continue until you receive a response from the SRA which you reserve the right to bring to the attention of the court
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • mowkid
    • By mowkid 19th Sep 16, 6:05 PM
    • 39 Posts
    • 51 Thanks
    mowkid
    • #7
    • 19th Sep 16, 6:05 PM
    • #7
    • 19th Sep 16, 6:05 PM
    Thanks folks. I feel a bit better now. I've just got a couple more ideas from your posts to put in the next letter to bw.
    If and when the answer this week from SRA I will put it on here.
    • mowkid
    • By mowkid 20th Sep 16, 11:45 AM
    • 39 Posts
    • 51 Thanks
    mowkid
    • #8
    • 20th Sep 16, 11:45 AM
    • #8
    • 20th Sep 16, 11:45 AM
    I emailed that letter from bw to the SRA along with an email asking them to add it to the recent complaint. Queried why they are allowing their well respected profession to be taken over by bandits.
    • Fixtrace6
    • By Fixtrace6 21st Sep 16, 10:12 AM
    • 32 Posts
    • 33 Thanks
    Fixtrace6
    • #9
    • 21st Sep 16, 10:12 AM
    • #9
    • 21st Sep 16, 10:12 AM
    I have received the same letter. There is a pattern - they send a generic template letter followed by a slightly more personalised cut and paste in a bigger envelope (and on better paper) followed by another inaccurate template letter followed by the cut and paste in the bigger envelope etc
    I have replied pointing out some of their inaccuracies.
    • mowkid
    • By mowkid 21st Sep 16, 10:37 AM
    • 39 Posts
    • 51 Thanks
    mowkid
    I have received the same letter. There is a pattern - they send a generic template letter followed by a slightly more personalised cut and paste in a bigger envelope (and on better paper) followed by another inaccurate template letter followed by the cut and paste in the bigger envelope etc
    I have replied pointing out some of their inaccuracies.
    Originally posted by Fixtrace6
    Thanks for your post Fixtrace. They are obviously incompetents because in this letter they say they haven't had a response to a letter of 25th July but in a previous letter they refered to our letter of 2nd August.
    They may be incompetent but still worrying and dangerous.
    Have you complained to the SRA. We sent a copy of this letter to back up the first complaint but haen't heard the SRA verdict yet although they did acknowledge reeipt.
    • mowkid
    • By mowkid 21st Sep 16, 11:03 AM
    • 39 Posts
    • 51 Thanks
    mowkid
    I'm very grateful for the advice and comfort I've got from reading the comments of contributors to this forum. Although the case is not mine I'm still trying to follow the old motto I learned in the RAF.
    That is the six P's. Planning and Preparation Prevent P*** Poor Performance so I'm trying to get au-fait with as much procedure as I can.
    I may be a bit thick but I'm struggling a bit with this Part 18. What is it Part 18 of? Anybody please.
    • nigelbb
    • By nigelbb 21st Sep 16, 7:01 PM
    • 1,832 Posts
    • 2,502 Thanks
    nigelbb
    I therefore think I'm right in saying that they will have to establish who the driver was, and if they can't establish this, they won't get anywhere. Keeper Liability is a PoFA-thing, and if they want to apply PoFA to an incident that pre-dates it, they'll have to prove that everything they sent out was PoFA-compliant, which it probably won't be.
    Originally posted by Carthesis
    As with almost all laws passed by parliament POFA 2012 is not retrospective legislation. There is not & cannot be Keeper Liability for parking 'crimes' committed before October 2012
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 21st Sep 16, 7:59 PM
    • 3,595 Posts
    • 3,983 Thanks
    beamerguy
    As with almost all laws passed by parliament POFA 2012 is not retrospective legislation. There is not & cannot be Keeper Liability for parking 'crimes' committed before October 2012
    Originally posted by nigelbb
    Nigel, of course you are right. There is a lot of confusion about what they can do before POFA2012 and after POFA2012

    I suggest this also applies to BWLegal as not understanding what is required pre POFA2012.

    As you say ...
    There is no Keeper liability pre POFA 2012
    The law pre POFA 2012 means it is the driver who they need to take to court. If they don't know who the driver is, taking the keeper to court would be a major problem.
    Even a judge using the probability factor could not prove to himself that the keeper was the driver at the time.
    The only problem would be a judge who lacks knowledge of pre POFA 2012 but hopefully not.

    As I see it, BW Legal have picked up these old cases without the knowledge and now they realise it is the driver they need to be talking to, hence them asking "who was the driver"

    Scratching at straws is not a legal term but that is what BWLegal are doing.

    The more people who complain to the SRA, the better as BWLegal are doing severe damage to an industry once respected
    Last edited by beamerguy; 21-09-2016 at 8:03 PM.
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 21st Sep 16, 9:09 PM
    • 10,272 Posts
    • 15,143 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    The only problem would be a judge who lacks knowledge of pre POFA 2012 but hopefully not.
    And which is why any pre-PoFA motorist needs to get to fully understand the intricacies of PoFA and be able to articulate and argue them, maybe even with the Judge.

    In many of the threads opened here, this seems to be a very hard ask at times.
    NEWBIES - wise up - DO NOT IGNORE A PARKING CHARGE NOTICE - you have been warned!

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.

    Please note: I am NOT involved in any 'paid for' appeals service.
    • mowkid
    • By mowkid 22nd Sep 16, 3:33 PM
    • 39 Posts
    • 51 Thanks
    mowkid
    Thanks folks. I feel a bit better now. I've just got a couple more ideas from your posts to put in the next letter to bw.
    If and when the answer this week from SRA I will put it on here.
    Originally posted by mowkid
    My carer lady has now received a response from SRA to the complaint.
    I don't know if I am contravening some ruling on confidentiality if I post it on here.(opinions please) but basically it says that they are aware of these concerns and are investigating them. Apart from that it is pretty full of ifs and maybes. To be honest I'm a bit disappointed.
    They also included a standard sheet which talks about up to 12 months for a decision or conclusion.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 22nd Sep 16, 5:18 PM
    • 38,383 Posts
    • 49,822 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    It's been posted up before last week by others who have also got the same.
    PCN in a private car park in England/Wales? DON'T PAY IT BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    USE THE 'FORUM JUMP' ON RIGHT, GO TO THE PARKING TICKETS FORUM. READ THE 'NEWBIES' THREAD.
    Do NOT read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 22nd Sep 16, 5:45 PM
    • 3,595 Posts
    • 3,983 Thanks
    beamerguy
    My carer lady has now received a response from SRA to the complaint.
    I don't know if I am contravening some ruling on confidentiality if I post it on here.(opinions please) but basically it says that they are aware of these concerns and are investigating them. Apart from that it is pretty full of ifs and maybes. To be honest I'm a bit disappointed.
    They also included a standard sheet which talks about up to 12 months for a decision or conclusion.
    Originally posted by mowkid
    I think as they said they are investigating is good enough. They will not give you the in's and out's as they are a secretive bunch.

    In the meantime, if your carer gets any more letters from BWLegal, just reply by saying you are currently awaiting the results of the SRA investigation.

    BWLegal, despite all their bluster will not want their dirty washing aired in a court
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • Marktheshark
    • By Marktheshark 22nd Sep 16, 5:50 PM
    • 5,077 Posts
    • 6,364 Thanks
    Marktheshark
    I would send them a letter saying for heavens sake get on with it.
    See you at court.
    Brexit will become whatever they invent it to be.
    • mowkid
    • By mowkid 22nd Sep 16, 10:17 PM
    • 39 Posts
    • 51 Thanks
    mowkid
    It's been posted up before last week by others who have also got the same.
    Originally posted by Coupon-mad
    This is what6 we got from SRA

    "Your report about BW Legal Services Ltd
    Thank you for your report form which we received on 12 September 2016 and your email of
    15 September 2016.
    We have assessed the information that you have sent us about B W Legal Services and
    their debt collection for car park violation fees.
    You have reported that the firm may be taking advantage of unrepresented third parties.
    You are concerned that their letters are misleading and they are attempting to recover costs
    that are not legally recoverable or not substantiated.
    What happens next
    We are aware of the issues that you have raised and we are presently investigating them. At
    the end of our investigation, we will decide whether:
    • to ask the firm to improve their systems and procedures
    • we need a formal investigation which could lead to sanctions or restrictions on the
    way the firm operates
    • we do not need to take further action.
    When will you hear from us
    If we need any further information, we will contact you. Otherwise, we will write to you when
    we have finished our investigation and tell you what we have decided to do.
    Further Information
    If at any time you have concerns about our service, please let us know. We have an internal
    complaints procedure, and we will do everything we can to resolve your complaints and
    respond positively to your comments. You can contact; our member of staff dealing with the
    The regulator"
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 23rd Sep 16, 9:13 AM
    • 3,595 Posts
    • 3,983 Thanks
    beamerguy
    We have assessed the information that you have sent us about B W Legal Services and their debt collection for car park violation fees.


    What happens next
    We are aware of the issues that you have raised and we are presently investigating them. At
    the end of our investigation, we will decide whether:
    • to ask the firm to improve their systems and procedures
    • we need a formal investigation which could lead to sanctions or restrictions on the
    way the firm operates
    we do not need to take further action.
    Originally posted by mowkid
    Let us hope that the SRA DO NOT FOCUS on "car park violation fees" ??

    The focus is on BWLegal directly as to their menacing and threatening letters and bully boy tactics.

    If the SRA say "no need to take action", the SRA will fall into disrepute including their own principals
    Last edited by beamerguy; 23-09-2016 at 9:16 AM.
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim's to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

107Posts Today

2,432Users online

Martin's Twitter