Help with PE - 2nd LBCCC

newholme30

As a brief update, [Text removed by MSE Forum Team] has had the courtesy of replying to my letter (well at least signing it) however the response appears to have large chunks of template text and fails to address a number of the points in a manner I would expect of a 'personal' reply. Additionally a number of the dates quoted of their correspondence do not tally at all with the actual dates the letters were sent!

Unfortunately this gives me even further concern to the professionalism I would expect of a solicitor and in this company in this matter.

I will be taking some time to consider the inaccuracies in this latest correspondence and will be seeking further clarifications.

zzzLazyDaisy

newholme30 wrote: »

I will be taking some time to consider the inaccuracies in this latest correspondence and will be seeking further clarifications.

If it was me, I wouldn't bother seeking further clarifications from [Text removed by MSE Forum Team].

You have plenty of evidence that PE legal dept has not complied with its duties under the practice direction, and has failed to read and respond to your queries in a way which you are entitled to expect, and the response to your personal complaint to the Supervising Solicitor the blocks of generic template text and the incorrect dates etc - make it clear that the solicitor has not deal with your complaint with any degree of competency or professionalism.

There is a steady stream of complaints going into the SRA at the moment about non-compliance with the PD, and this is one of the most appalling catalogue of failings that I have seen.

I would let the SRA take over from here.

Daisy

Umkomaas

zzzLazyDaisy wrote: »

If it was me, I wouldn't bother seeking further clarifications from [Text removed by MSE Forum Team].

You have plenty of evidence that PE legal dept has not complied with its duties under the practice direction, and has failed to read and respond to your queries in a way which you are entitled to expect, and the response to your personal complaint to the Supervising Solicitor the blocks of generic template text and the incorrect dates etc - make it clear that the solicitor has not deal with your complaint with any degree of competency or professionalism.

There is a steady stream of complaints going into the SRA at the moment about non-compliance with the PD, and this is one of the most appalling catalogue of failings that I have seen.

I would let the SRA take over from here.

Daisy

I wonder who'll be first to issue the 'Dear Rachel' letter - the SRA or Capita?

newholme30

Thanks Daisy

I have taken the time to consider this and agree with you. This was a last chance for both [Text removed by MSE Forum Team] and Parking Eye to sort this out; not surprisingly they have blown the opportunity to redeem themselves.

Sadly, despite the good intentions of the Mr Briant at Fistral in resolving this, I am struggling to see how we will ever be able to visit again whilst Parking Eye are 'managing' this space

Who would really want the hassle of nearly 2 months of writing letters which are completely ignored to prove one's innocence; we would I'm afraid to say rather avoid the place entirely

newholme30

Umkomaas wrote: »

I wonder who'll be first to issue the 'Dear Rachel' letter - the SRA or Capita?

My view is, she simply does not care - it is clear from her various profiles across the internet that money is her motivator and everything about this company stinks. A cynic might infer that [Text removed by MSE Forum Team] was far too busy with this sale to Capita over the past few months, inflating the value of Parking Eye with their 20% increase in DVLA RK requests and her non-compliant letters, to consider treating their 'customers' with the professionalism one would expect from her.

Capita are crazy to pay circa £50M for this rotten businees and whoever did their due-diligence needs sacking. Of the 800 odd car parks they 'manage', I am sure Aldi at least (or should be) reviewing this arrangement very very carefully....

Coupon-mad

newholme30 wrote: »

Thanks Daisy

I have taken the time to consider this and agree with you. This was a last chance for both [Text removed by MSE Forum Team] and Parking Eye to sort this out; not surprisingly they have blown the opportunity to redeem themselves.

Sadly, despite the good intentions of the Mr Briant at Fistral in resolving this, I am struggling to see how we will ever be able to visit again whilst Parking Eye are 'managing' this space

Who would really want the hassle of nearly 2 months of writing letters which are completely ignored to prove one's innocence; we would I'm afraid to say rather avoid the place entirely

Seen this?:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/parkingeye-witness-statement-debacle_19.html

and this:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/do-you-have-court-hearing-with.html