MET Parking at McDonalds

Big_Ells

The_Deep wrote: »

Hang on Big fellow, that is a bit unfair, you have no idea how many numnuts we have to deal with here.


Besides you asked for four links not one.

Perhaps my bad a bit, didn't realise it was 4 links and took a while to find out WHOPLA was an acronym created by this forum.

But being pleasant to each other isn't hard into this day and age.

The_Deep

I realise that the SRA distance themselves from complaints about solicitors acting as adjudicators, but in this case WH appear to be accepting money to act in this capacity, but not delivering the service for which they are being paid.


Surely to deliberately ignore applicable law is worthy of a complaint to the SPA?


What do you think big man?


http://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/problems/report-solicitor.page

Big_Ells

Thank you for the help

I have a form for the SRA to fill out which I will send out.
I have emailed the 'complaints' email at WH
I have also emailed McDonalds press office, customer services and MD about the whole debacle.

I would also suggest that anyone else having issues with WH goes on google and leaves a review to show that people aren't happy
Reviews on the right https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Wright+Hassell&rlz=1C1DIMA_enGB700GB700&oq=Wright+Hassell&aqs=chrome..69i57&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#q=Wright+Hassall

fisherjim

This sort of thing makes my blood steam!
If you clearly list 5 points in your defence, how come these inept Muppets only respond to 4!

Also, stating; "We are in receipt of sufficient evidence from the Car Park Operator to satisfy us that the Car Park Operator", without sharing it is not good enough, considering their ineptitude, and arguable bias!

The_Deep

I have emailed the complaints partner at


complaintspartner@wrighthassall.co.uk suggesting that the firm need to raise the game.

Big_Ells

fisherjim wrote: »

This sort of thing makes my blood steam!
If you clearly list 5 points in your defence, how come these inept Muppets only respond to 4!

Also, stating; "We are in receipt of sufficient evidence from the Car Park Operator to satisfy us that the Car Park Operator", without sharing it is not good enough, considering their ineptitude, and arguable bias!

That is what I raised. i said they cannot cherry pick the points that they can side with the enforcement agent on and ignore the rest.

Big_Ells

So if you didn't know Wright Hassall are a joke. I complained to their complaints and got this email back

Dear Mr XXXXX

We refer to your email of 7 September 2016.

As confirmed in the email sent to you by the Complaints Officer on 7 September 2016, your correspondence falls outside of the firm’s complaint process and so it was passed to the Lead Assessor for POPLA appeals. Unfortunately, as stated in the decision letter of even date, our decision on the appeal is final. We are not at liberty to review the decision.

Further, the decision is not something that we are in position to discuss and our letter clearly states that we are not able to respond to any future correspondence from either party. Should you dispute the outcome of the appeal, you are at liberty to refrain from paying the PCN and defend any court proceedings which the Car Park Operator may subsequently bring against you for non-payment.

In relation to your statement as to Wright Hassall’s independence and quality of service, ISPA (Independent Scrutiny Board for Parking Appeals) have audited Wright Hassall to ensure that a robust and auditable process is in place to manage the appeals process which will provide a fair outcome for both the appellant and the car park operator. Wright Hassall undertake reviews on POPLA appeals where there is no existing relationship with either the appellant or the car park operator, and so the POPLA appeals are processed on a wholly independent and impartial basis.

Please note that any further correspondence received on this matter will not be responded to.

Yours faithfully

Wright Hassall LLP
On behalf of Parking on Private Land Appeals

Castle

Send a copy of that letter to the ISPA and get them to confirm what WH have said is true.

Big_Ells

So today I received a letter from MET demanding payment before they pass it onto a debt collection agency.

Should I just file it and ignore any followups or send a letter back?

The_Deep

You must be trembling in your boots.


Please note that any further correspondence received on this matter will not be responded to.

Copy this to the SRA. I have today brought to their attention the widespread concern that WH are not fulfilling their role as an independent adjudicator.