The "no reply" stance

usignuolo

Actually I have been thinking it over and in fact the demand came from a debt collection agency to whom the original "fine" had been sold. The debt collection agency actually wrote me a letter (afraid I did not keep it) telling me I was liable as the registered owner. So they were lying?

BFG_2

Possibly the letter didn't actually specifically claim you were liable [as the RK], but was cleverly worded to make you infer that that was what they were saying.

After all, thats what dca specialise in....blurring the truth, emphasising what MIGHT happen etc....[eg IF we go to court and IF we win and IF you default on payment your children MIGHT be sold into slavery, etc]

Hope that makes sense

Coblcris

usignuolo wrote: »

Actually I have been thinking it over and in fact the demand came from a debt collection agency to whom the original "fine" had been sold. The debt collection agency actually wrote me a letter (afraid I did not keep it) telling me I was liable as the registered owner. So they were lying?

If they said that then yes they were lying. They were also committing an offense in my opinion.

usignuolo

So if these firms are misrepresenting the law (to put it mildly) how come solicitors are accepting instructions to send out threatening letters on their behalf when their threats have no legal standing?

trisontana

usignuolo wrote: »

So if these firms are misrepresenting the law (to put it mildly) how come solicitors are accepting instructions to send out threatening letters on their behalf when their threats have no legal standing?

I am afraid that there are some very dodgy solicitors out there. Just think about those dozens of them who creamed off millions of pounds that should have gone to coal miners under the Injury Compensation Scheme; The Leeds solicitor who promoted a "boiler room" scam, and the Bristol solicitor who reckoned a notorious pyramid scam was legitimate.

Emily1990_2

usignuolo wrote: »

So if these firms are misrepresenting the law (to put it mildly) how come solicitors are accepting instructions to send out threatening letters on their behalf when their threats have no legal standing?

They get paid a lot of money for it?

It's from a 'legal department', not a qualified solicitor?

In any case, if solicitors are sending these letters they should be reported to the SRA IMO.

Emily1990_2

trisontana wrote: »

I am afraid that there are some very dodgy solicitors out there. Just think about those dozens of them who creamed off millions of pounds that should have gone to coal miners under the Injury Compensation Scheme; The Leeds solicitor who promoted a "boiler room" scam, and the Bristol solicitor who reckoned a notorious pyramid scam was legitimate.

Sadly some solicitors give the rest a bad name. I am currently studying to become one and I would never wish to be associated with the so-called professionals you have detailed above.

Contrary to popular belief, honesty is at the core of the solicitor's profession, if you have a criminal conviction, particularly for dishonesty offences, you will have a very hard time convincing the Law Society to admit you.

Anyhoo, I digress.