Parking Collection Services on behalf of Senitor Security

give_them_FA

Yes you can tell that not only are they claims that went by default they are clearly not parking charges- there is one in there for £980!

Companies like this will issue claims when letters come back undelivered because the addressee has moved- so they know the claim will go undefended. They see it as worth losing the Court fee in order to produce what looks like an impressive list to scare people into thinking they are serious... actually, NOT that impressive considering the thousands of threats they issue each year, and all they can show is a handful of "victories" by default.

They won't be telling you about the ones where they got hammered... like the most recent one where they had to pay out damages for harassment!

Do not worry, they won't be doing anything to you. If they try it on someone who actually receives the Court papers, they know they will lose....

ManxRed

A lot of these are for unpaid utility bills, apparently.

Stephen_Leak

give_them_FA wrote: »

<snip> Companies like this will issue claims when letters come back undelivered because the addressee has moved- so they know the claim will go undefended. <snip>

But wouldn't the court papers also come back undelivered to the court?

give_them_FA

Only if someone returns them. A lot of people can't be bothered and will bin letters for previous occupants. Particularly in multiple occupied houses. Whether things get returned can be very hit and miss!

HO87

ManxRed wrote: »

A lot of these are for unpaid utility bills, apparently.

A quarter of them also seem to originate from the Bradford area - if 192.com is to be believed and looking at the more common names there are a good few potentially from the same area. Odd if its a nationwide exercise?

Bradford

Jozef Demlak
Robert Pulko
Philip Oyewale
Claud Mkosi
Samir Higgins
Wisdom Sabawu

interstellaflyer

Another thing, the words Debt Recovery Plus were clearly visable through the window in the envelope, I'm sure this is not good practice at best and probably ilegal under data protection act.

give_them_FA

Did you really expect "good practice" from a bunch of shysters like this? Come on now!

If there was any good practise in this industry, it wouldn't exist.

It is built around threats and harassment. Realise that, and you understand how to deal with it.

And realise the reason for this, it is because they do NOT actually have any lawful means to proceed.

interstellaflyer

give_them_FA wrote: »

Did you really expect "good practice" from a bunch of shysters like this? Come on now!

If there was any good practise in this industry, it wouldn't exist.

It is built around threats and harassment. Realise that, and you understand how to deal with it.

And realise the reason for this, it is because they do NOT actually have any lawful means to proceed.

Yes I understand that, but these type of letters are suposed to be private and confidential, so I'm guessing that being able to identify the letter as from a debt collection agencey just by looking at the address window, is probably ilegal, it certainly wasn't accidental.

esmerobbo

Very rounded figures for all those judgements? If they are real then they are missing their interest on the claim!;)

Now seeing they would have to own the debt or be a solicitor acting for the owners to get a judgement, then they or their solicitor aint very good!

esmerobbo

interstellaflyer wrote: »

Yes I understand that, but these type of letters are suposed to be private and confidential, so I'm guessing that being able to identify the letter as from a debt collection agencey just by looking at the address window, is probably ilegal, it certainly wasn't accidental.

I doubt it is illegal but its deffo against the OFT guidance on debt collection.