Advice welcomed - Popla appeal rejected, solicitors letter received

bunzee

bazster wrote: »

Not sure what you are expecting to read.

The claim is what it is, they can't increase it now except to add the court fee (£25) and a very small amount in costs (£50 max).

Someone might contact you but I suspect you'll need to show considerably more fight than this for someone to volunteer to represent you!

Point taken - fight mode engaged

salmosalaris

Marktheshark wrote: »

It is not correct in that it is not signed by a person.
The letter is also not compliant with the SRA code of practice as it has not been signed by a legally trained person, unless there is a solicitor who,s name is Gladstone Solicitors
A letter sent on behalf of a solicitor must have the name and position and the person sending the letter or be signed on behalf of a senior partner .
Such as PP on behalf of "fred Blogs" Senior partner.
The letter is also misleading in that they are acting as a collection agent under Credit services Association firm GSL collection yet making Legal threats.

Forward the letter to the SRA complaints.
They pretend to be stupid so you will have to point out what you think is wrong.
Sending debt collection letters from a collection company whilst mimicking a LBC from a solicitor but not actually signed by a solicitor.
Therefore you are unable to decipher if they have sent you a pre-action protocol LBC or a debt collecting letter.
The demand is confusing and misleading and the senior partner should be made responsible for sending unsigned letters.
http://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/problems/report-solicitor.page#how-report-sra

A completely useless way of approaching this for the OP

Northlakes

Just done a quick check but it doesn't appear that either Moto or CP Plus have planning permission for the ANPR cameras or signage at this site.

Worth checking this out with Exeter City Council Planning Department.

Herzlos

salmosalaris wrote: »

A completely useless way of approaching this for the OP

Why? Every legal breach by the solicitors/collectors working for these scum should involve a complaint to the SRA. Sure it won't get them to drop the invoice, but it'll hurt them and hopefully get them to stop pulling this stuff on other people.

bazster

Herzlos wrote: »

Why? Every legal breach by the solicitors/collectors working for these scum should involve a complaint to the SRA. Sure it won't get them to drop the invoice, but it'll hurt them and hopefully get them to stop pulling this stuff on other people.

If there is a breach. I've seen nothing beyond Marktheshark's repeated assertions to suggest that a law firm sending out letters which are not personally signed is a breach of anything. In my experience it's absolutely standard practice for all law firms and I'm pretty sure I recall seeing an SRA response to a complaint which stated exactly that.

I'm inclined to agree with salmosalaris, it's a red herring and a distraction the OP doesn't need.

Coupon-mad

I agree with bazster and salmosalaris.

Certainly letters from Solicitors are almost NEVER signed by a partner! Mark the shark I have no idea where you got that from, it's perfectly normal/usual for a Solicitor to 'sign' with the firm's name. Look at any letters you got from your solicitor when moving house, etc., in the past.

OP please remind us if you ever said who was driving in any appeal? CP Plus don't use compliant Notice to Keeper letters, so if they tried court that would be one point of defence 'no keeper liability'.

That letter needs a response as per the 'LBCCC Fightback' thread. Also you should complain to MOTO who do cancel PCNs for people who were sleeping/resting and were genuine patrons.