ZZPS Ltd and Wright Hassall LLP

Coupon-mad

It's up to you. I would ignore it. But others can't.

serapis

Marktheshark wrote: »

Have Wright Hassall added on a "admin fee" to this invoice.
thats is very naughty indeed and needs to be complained about to the SRA if they have.

Fee went from £75 to £150 and is now £160 after going to Wright Hassall, so it does appear they have added £10 to the overall invoice.

serapis

Coupon-mad wrote: »

It's up to you. I would ignore it. But others can't.

Can't? How come?

waamo

Some people, for reasons only they can explain, feel the need to contact debt collectors despite all the advice not too. Personally I would ignore them.

bod1467

As above, it's in some people's psyche that they simply HAVE to engage with anyone that contacts them, despite best advice to the contrary.

serapis

Thanks guys. I'll ignore from now on and cancel the cheque with my bank.

If they did go down the route of court action, would the fact I have offered to pay and made contact help me fight my case or would I end up with a CCJ?

Umkomaas

serapis wrote: »

Thanks guys. I'll ignore from now on and cancel the cheque with my bank.

If they did go down the route of court action, would the fact I have offered to pay and made contact help me fight my case or would I end up with a CCJ?

The WH/ZZPS axis won't take you to court! The only claimants would be Excel or (highly unlikely) the landowner - and you've had no LBA from either of these.

Why do you think you'd end up with a CCJ (which I presume you mean one that will affect your credit rating)? CCJs of this nature only come about if the court finds against you, award costs against you and you refuse/forget to pay it by its due date. You are the only person who can guarantee the receipt of a CCJ!

You're worrying too much about this, and not understanding things like how a credit rating affecting CCJ works is really heightening your anxiety levels.

bazster

Umkomaas wrote: »

You're worrying too much about this, and not understanding things like how a credit rating affecting CCJ works is really heightening your anxiety levels.

Which is exactly why Right Hassle needs to be taken to task by the SRA. The following is expressly set out by the SRA as an example of taking unfair advantage of a third party, which is forbidden under the SRA Code of Conduct:

taking unfair advantage of an opposing party's lack of legal knowledge where they have not instructed a lawyer;

serapis

Umkomaas wrote: »

The WH/ZZPS axis won't take you to court! The only claimants would be Excel or (highly unlikely) the landowner - and you've had no LBA from either of these.

Why do you think you'd end up with a CCJ (which I presume you mean one that will affect your credit rating)? CCJs of this nature only come about if the court finds against you, award costs against you and you refuse/forget to pay it by its due date. You are the only person who can guarantee the receipt of a CCJ!

You're worrying too much about this, and not understanding things like how a credit rating affecting CCJ works is really heightening your anxiety levels.

Umkomaas, Thanks for the assurance. You are correct, I'm worried as I have a (now paid) default on my credit rating from when I lost my job over 5 years ago which is due to come off my credit file later this year. The last thing I want is a CCJ ruining my last 5 years of keeping everything on my file perfect.

I'll sit tight and file the letters as advised.

Thanks again for the info, much appreciated

trisontana

bazster wrote: »

Which is exactly why Right Hassle needs to be taken to task by the SRA. The following is expressly set out by the SRA as an example of taking unfair advantage of a third party, which is forbidden under the SRA Code of Conduct:

taking unfair advantage of an opposing party's lack of legal knowledge where they have not instructed a lawyer;

I don't know if anyone has read the latest copy of Private Eye? There is an article in there about George Galloway sending huge legal bills of £5,000 to anyone who have supposedly libeled him on Twitter . His law firm were charging £500 per hour. This was supposed to include locating the offending accounts ( in reality a 10 minute job) and sending out generic letters .

Luckily two other law firms have got involved on the side of the recipients of those threatening letters. One firm has reported GG's law firm to the police for fraud, and the second one has reported them to the SRA. One quote from the article:-

"The SRA COP says lawyers should not take unfair advantage of an opposing party's lack of legal knowledge"

I think this situation is very similar to PPC cases.