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
    • 59Posts
    • 84Thanks
    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 3
    • mowkid
    • By mowkid 1st Oct 16, 2:21 PM
    • 59 Posts
    • 84 Thanks
    mowkid
    Hi mowkid. Have you heard anything else yet? As fix trace predicted I have today received the 'only folded in half and on more expensive paper' template letter assuring me that their letters 'do not intend to mislead or intimidate' (really), 'their client does not rely on pofa 2012' (and the relevance of that is?) and if I do not let them have the details of the driver then their client will 'reasonably presume that I was the driver'. So looks like another round of chuckle brother tennis with me to serve..........
    Originally posted by Fedupwiththis
    I haven't seen my Carer for a few days and the letters go to her so I'm not sure. I know as of Thurs last she had not had any more letters from bw.
    I know the whole thing is causing her great distress as she definately cannot afford this level of charge being quoted. Like you I have tried to confound bw with guidance from the good people on this forum but it's still a worry.
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 1st Oct 16, 3:48 PM
    • 4,109 Posts
    • 4,715 Thanks
    beamerguy
    I haven't seen my Carer for a few days and the letters go to her so I'm not sure. I know as of Thurs last she had not had any more letters from bw.
    I know the whole thing is causing her great distress as she definately cannot afford this level of charge being quoted. Like you I have tried to confound bw with guidance from the good people on this forum but it's still a worry.
    Originally posted by mowkid
    I think you should stop worrying and placate your carer.

    From everything I read on the forums, BWLegal are right now "up a stream without a paddle"

    This can work two ways ...
    1: The SRA sanction them or even more, which will give a huge warning to the other rogue solicitors that they could be next.
    I think that Gladstones and Wright Hassall will be next.
    Right now, the SRA has no option if they are to remain credible

    2: The SRA brush this under the carpet (very doubtful) which will then lead to the question about them as an authority and indeed all solicitors

    BWLegal has shamed itself to it's own regulator especially abusing the "principals" they accepted when joining the SRA

    The SRA really has no option now
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • mowkid
    • By mowkid 3rd Oct 16, 3:29 PM
    • 59 Posts
    • 84 Thanks
    mowkid
    Received a letter from bw saying they are approaching their client Excel to get authority for going further.
    This is the second one of those so I assume they just send out some sort of automated replies.
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 3rd Oct 16, 4:22 PM
    • 4,109 Posts
    • 4,715 Thanks
    beamerguy
    Received a letter from bw saying they are approaching their client Excel to get authority for going further.
    This is the second one of those so I assume they just send out some sort of automated replies.
    Originally posted by mowkid
    What a motly bunch of solicitors BWLegal are ??
    No good for the reputation of the SRA.

    So, with all their previous correspondence, all their bluster, lies, and misrepresentation plus harassment, it seems they were only acting as debt collectors. They gave the impression that this was the end of the line and now ....... they need authority from Excel ???

    Do please raise a new complaint to the SRA about this BWLegal fanfair of fabrications

    Again tell BWLegal that this is on hold pending further investigations with the SRA.
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • mowkid
    • By mowkid 13th Oct 16, 12:02 PM
    • 59 Posts
    • 84 Thanks
    mowkid
    We received a letter from bw that I didn't put it on the forum stating that even though the parking "sin" was pre POFA the signs state that the keeper is responsible for any PCN.
    I know that Excel left this car park soon after my carers so called contravention. I therefore asked them for proof of the signage by way of a photo' sigfned by an indepedent witness on or around the date in question.
    Their reply is below. They still keep quoting Elliot v Loake even though I thought that this so called precedent had been discounted. Theyn are now throwing in VCS who have never been mentioned before.




    Dear Madam

    Our Client: Excel Parking Services Ltd

    Account Number: L II!')

    Balance: £154,00 ("the Balance")

    We write in reference to the above matter and in response to your recent correspondence.

    It is VCS's position that it is the lawful occupier of the site and enforces and manages the site terms in
    a reasonable manor.

    We note your comments that we have no evidence of who was driving on the day of the contravention
    and therefore the case ofElliot v Loake [1982] is irrelevant. As you have failed to provide full
    particulars of the alleged driver upon receipt of the PCN, or at all, you have failed to comply with the
    terms of the PCN. Your failure to do so can only be regarded as deliberate.

    Furthermore, in the absence of the full details of the driver being provided, our client is entitled to
    proceed on the reasonable presumption that the registered keeper was the driver on the Contravention
    Date. This is supported by the case of Elliott v Loake [1983].

    We have requested photographs of the signage at the site from our client. We have placed your
    account on hold whilst the query is ongoing. This will be provided to you upon receipt.

    Please note, as established members of the Independent Parking Committee, our client adheres to their
    Code of Practice for Private Enforcement on Private Land and Unregulated Car Parks ("Code of
    Practice"). This Code of Practice gives recommendations in regards to the signage within the Car
    Park. The signs within the Car Park comply with the Code of Practice and are therefore deemed
    reasonable.

    We will revert to you in due course.

    Yours faithfully

    BWLegal
    • pappa golf
    • By pappa golf 13th Oct 16, 12:24 PM
    • 5,341 Posts
    • 4,866 Thanks
    pappa golf
    that letter is so wrong


    our client is entitled to
    proceed on the reasonable presumption that the registered keeper was the driver on the Contravention
    Date. WRONG , PRE POPLA


    This is supported by the case of Elliott v Loake [1983]. WRONG , that was a criminal case


    Please note, as established members of the Independent Parking Committee, our client adheres to their
    Code of Practice for Private Enforcement on Private Land and Unregulated Car Parks ("Code of
    Practice"). This Code of Practice gives recommendations in regards to the signage within the Car park WRONG , They were BPA members at the time


    Our Client: Excel Parking Services Ltd , It is VCS's position that it is the lawful occupier of the site TWO separate companies .


    EXCEL
    Company number: 02878122



    VCS
    Company number: 02498820


    their letter is worth reporting to the SRA , it is so misleading and untrue
    Have YOU had to walk 500 miles?
    Were you advised to walk 500 more?
    You could be entitled to compensation.
    Call the Pro Claimers NOW.
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 13th Oct 16, 12:34 PM
    • 4,109 Posts
    • 4,715 Thanks
    beamerguy
    Everything said by pappa is correct

    BWLegal are digging a huge hole for themselves. Their lack of knowledge is beyond belief ..... should they really be allowed to practice using the SRA status ???

    YES, a further complaint to the SRA is required enclosing a copy of the letter and pointing out to the SRA THE ERRORS and fabrications quoted by BWLegal
    Last edited by beamerguy; 13-10-2016 at 12:37 PM.
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 13th Oct 16, 12:35 PM
    • 5,561 Posts
    • 4,268 Thanks
    The Deep
    Why not reply thusly


    WRT Elliot v Loake, I shall be happy to tell the Court why this criminal case is irrelevant. However, if I have to do so, when I prevail, I shall be seeking punitive damages and full costs from your client for their unreasonable behaviour under CPR27.14(2)(g).
    • Herzlos
    • By Herzlos 13th Oct 16, 12:52 PM
    • 4,059 Posts
    • 3,550 Thanks
    Herzlos
    They are going to keep insisting that Elliot v Loake is valid, because if they admit now that it's nonsense it'll make them look terrible. Continue to complain to the SRA about it, but don't worry too much.

    The Deeps reply above is a fair one; don't bother discussing the details of why Elliot v Loake doesn't apply (they already know), but just highlight that you're happy to bring it up in court and are confident you'll be successful.

    I'd send a detailed complaint to the SRA highlighting every factual error in the letter, there's loads:

    As you have failed to provide full
    particulars of the alleged driver upon receipt of the PCN(1), or at all, you have failed to comply with the
    terms of the PCN (2). Your failure to do so can only be regarded as deliberate (3).
    1. There's no evidence that you have had receipt of the PCN, since you're not the driver.
    2a. You can't comply with the terms of the PCN, since again, no indication you received it as you're not the driver.
    2b. I'm pretty sure the terms on an invoice can't overrule your protections under the law, so PCN (which is a contract between the PPC and the driver) cannot transfer liability to anyone who isn't the driver.
    3. They can't "only [regard]" this as deliberate - this incident was pre-POFA? - So it's not reasonable for anyone to remember about this incident, especially if it was ignored at the time, due to looking like a hoax.
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 13th Oct 16, 1:27 PM
    • 10,953 Posts
    • 16,347 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    a reasonable manor.
    A template reply as we've seen 'manor' used instead of 'manner' just the other day.

    In your complaint to the SRA tell them that you wouldn't expect a qualified solicitor to have such an appalling grasp of the English language so as not to be able to distinguish 'manor' from 'manner'. The whole meaning of the sentence is changed to the point that it makes little sense in the context of the case
    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.
    • yotmon
    • By yotmon 13th Oct 16, 2:08 PM
    • 352 Posts
    • 466 Thanks
    yotmon


    We have requested photographs of the signage at the site from our client. We have placed your account on hold whilst the query is ongoing. This will be provided to you upon receipt.

    The signs within the Car Park comply with the Code of Practice and are therefore deemed reasonable.

    We will revert to you in due course.

    Yours faithfully

    BWLegal
    Originally posted by mowkid
    Have they been supplied with crystal balls at BW now ? In one breath they tell you that they have requested photos of the signage, then they say that the signs comply with the code of practice and are therefore deemed reasonable. Which one is it ?
    • DoaM
    • By DoaM 13th Oct 16, 2:31 PM
    • 994 Posts
    • 907 Thanks
    DoaM
    And to further add (as previously mentioned), at that time Excel / VCS (whichever company they think is the client - it can't be both) were BPA members ... IPC didn't even exist ... therefore the IPC code is irrelevant.

    Perhaps include this image with your next reply to them?

    Diary of a madman
    Walk the line again today
    Entries of confusion
    Dear diary, I'm here to stay
    • mowkid
    • By mowkid 13th Oct 16, 3:06 PM
    • 59 Posts
    • 84 Thanks
    mowkid
    I was straight on to SRA using all your suggested points.
    Thanks
    • mowkid
    • By mowkid 21st Nov 16, 11:48 AM
    • 59 Posts
    • 84 Thanks
    mowkid
    Things seem to go quiet for a while but now my carer lady has received a difficult to understand letter from bw as attached below.
    Are they totally incompetent ot what? They have sent sent letters over the past few months containing details of the alleged contravention but now say they are seeking details from their clinent.
    As for the SRA, I'm beginning to get visions of chocolate tespots in my head. My carer lady called them whilst i listened in. first they gave her a number to call which turned out to be the Legal Ombudsman. At he second try they took an age trying to find records of her complaint even though their reference numbers were given. final comment from them was " it's being investigated".
    don't hold your breathe anyone.

    Quote
    .Dear Madam
    Our Client: ExcelParkiDgSeiyices Ltd
    Account Number-
    Balance: £l54J)O(~e Balance"
    We write in reference to the above imatter and your recent correspondence.
    We note your comments, we can confirm we have not received any notification of a complaint
    raised from the SRA..
    We have requested evidence of the contravention from our client. We have placed your account on
    hold whilst the query is ongoing.
    We will revert to you in due course.
    Yours faithfully

    unquote
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 21st Nov 16, 12:40 PM
    • 4,109 Posts
    • 4,715 Thanks
    beamerguy
    Things seem to go quiet for a while but now my carer lady has received a difficult to understand letter from bw as attached below.
    Are they totally incompetent ot what? They have sent sent letters over the past few months containing details of the alleged contravention but now say they are seeking details from their clinent.
    As for the SRA, I'm beginning to get visions of chocolate tespots in my head. My carer lady called them whilst i listened in. first they gave her a number to call which turned out to be the Legal Ombudsman. At he second try they took an age trying to find records of her complaint even though their reference numbers were given. final comment from them was " it's being investigated".
    don't hold your breathe anyone.

    Quote
    .Dear Madam
    Our Client: ExcelParkiDgSeiyices Ltd
    Account Number-
    Balance: £l54J)O(~e Balance"
    We write in reference to the above imatter and your recent correspondence.
    We note your comments, we can confirm we have not received any notification of a complaint
    raised from the SRA..
    We have requested evidence of the contravention from our client. We have placed your account on
    hold whilst the query is ongoing.
    We will revert to you in due course.
    Yours faithfully

    unquote
    Originally posted by mowkid
    After all the threat-o-grams BWL sent you, we must ask the question "do BWLegal know what they doing" ?
    I think we all know the answer to that one ??

    This is costing BWLegal more money that the stupid ticket is worth, so the only reason is that BWLegal are vindictive

    Will Excel pick up the tab on this time wasting or maybe they are getting annoyed that have employed a legal company who is NOT giving the correct
    advice to them ?

    You must continue complaining to the SRA and now point out that BWLegal have denied any complaint from the SRA.
    Are the SRA taking complaints seriously or are they just the old boys club ?
    Last edited by beamerguy; 21-11-2016 at 12:45 PM.
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • mowkid
    • By mowkid 21st Nov 16, 1:26 PM
    • 59 Posts
    • 84 Thanks
    mowkid
    Hi Beamerguy,
    I have forwarded the latest as above to SRA.
    At first I had great hopes for the SRA but now they have had so long to deal with ours and other complaints that I'm afraid it's the age old story of "professionals" closing ranks and covering each others back.
Welcome to our new Forum!

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

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

2,003Posts Today

5,757Users online

Martin's Twitter