Old Job demanding money

MrrLucky

Hi all, thanks for your replies.

The firm itself calls themselves Solicitors on the letter I received, however research online they are Debt Collectors with some kind of legal background?

I emailed the company and also informed the solicitors I will be checking up with the company to check the credibility of the letter I received.

In regards to 1st class stamps - I did not receive the letter, so why should it be deemed delivered?

Thanks!

ampersand

DP - you need to head to some of our Parking Threads to know how seriously wrong this is:

'It really does not matter if they are not a real solicitor, they are the ones threatening court, which the employer have not themselves done. The worst consequence of them not being a solicitor is the waste of the price of a stamp.'

There has recently been national coverage of utility companies doing precisely this. It is a serious misrepresentation for which they are liable and can be held accountable.

ampersand

MrrLucky wrote: »

Hi all, thanks for your replies.

The firm itself calls themselves Solicitors on the letter I received, however research online they are Debt Collectors with some kind of legal background?

I emailed the company and also informed the solicitors I will be checking up with the company to check the credibility of the letter I received.

In regards to 1st class stamps - I did not receive the letter, so why should it be deemed delivered?

Thanks!

#
MrrLucky - exactly as I suspected.:T

You can name and shame them here, then put said name into the Search box over on the Parking Forum. You'll find how normal this is for such lowlifes.

If you email them - no need - ensure you take a printable screen shot.

I do hope you have a better employer now.
#
Just to reiterate, op - paper trail only with former employer. Thorsoak's letter.

Retain cop.

Let us know what happens.

Never be intimidated by bullying letters from DCs. Of course they pretend, use tv courtroom/tabloid legalese. How else to convince you?

Undervalued

MrrLucky wrote: »

In regards to 1st class stamps - I did not receive the letter, so why should it be deemed delivered?

Civil law works on the balance of probabilities (i.e 51%).

The overwhelming majority of properly addressed mail is delivered correctly (maybe 99.5%) so, if somebody has proof of posting, then generally a civil court will assume it was delivered.

If you could show that you were having particular problems with your mail delivery at the time then maybe that would influence their decision. Otherwise you will struggle to get a court to believe you didn't get a letter if the sender has proof of posting.

MrrLucky

The letter is from Coltman Warner Cranston, letter received was not a typical Debt Collection Agency and they did state they were a solicitors?

McKneff

Wastn there a lot of debt written off by the cc companies because they send out collection letters saying they were solicitors, when they were actually only debt collectors, thereby lying.....

Undervalued

It is also a criminal offence to falsely claim to be a solicitor.

DandelionPatrol

ampersand wrote: »

DP - you need to head to some of our Parking Threads to know how seriously wrong this is:

'It really does not matter if they are not a real solicitor, they are the ones threatening court, which the employer have not themselves done. The worst consequence of them not being a solicitor is the waste of the price of a stamp.'

There has recently been national coverage of utility companies doing precisely this. It is a serious misrepresentation for which they are liable and can be held accountable.

While I agree it is a scandal and it is wrong, it is the utility companies which are in the wrong, because the utility companies were passing themselves off as solicitors. And the essence of the wrongness was that by false representation they applied undue pressure on customers.

In OP's case, his employer [ie the initial alleged creditor] is not representing itself as a solicitor as far as I can see - they have passed the alleged debt over to a debt collector. If the debt collector is passing itself off as a solicitor, that is of course wrong and the point could be noted for later.

But if they were only a debt collector, not pretending to be a solicitor, I still say write to the debt collector, for exactly the same reasons. If they are a debt collector posing as a solicitor, there is no reason to do anything different from what you would do for a real solicitor or for a debt collector

The situation with so called Parking Fines, which is where I think you are coming from, is a little different from mainstream debt, as dealt with in Debt Free Wannabes, where it is entirely usual to deal with the debt collector.

If this outfit is indeed a debt collector, the debt has probably been assigned to them. It which case it is even less of a good idea to ignore them and deal with the ex-employer, because the employer has absolutely no further interest in the debt and is probably not obliged to pass on correspondence to the Debt Collector. Indeed if OP only writes to the ex-employer, the Debt Collector could engage a real solicitor and argue that as OP has ignored correspondence, they are entitled to go straight to court, with all pre - claim protocols fulfilled under Civil Procedure Rules, putting OP under considerable pressure to complete his case before trial.

I am adamant. OP should deal with this outfit whether they are a debt collector or a solicitor or a debt collector pretending to be a solicitor.

peter3hg

They are a genuine solicitors. They just specialise in debt recovery.
http://solicitors.lawsociety.org.uk/office/458712/coltman-warner-cranston-llp

LittleVoice

MrrLucky wrote: »

Hi all, thanks for your replies.

The firm itself calls themselves Solicitors on the letter I received, however research online they are Debt Collectors with some kind of legal background?

I emailed the company and also informed the solicitors I will be checking up with the company to check the credibility of the letter I received.

In regards to 1st class stamps - I did not receive the letter, so why should it be deemed delivered?

Thanks!

The mention of the 1st class stamp and being deemed delivered was a suggestion to you to use 1st class and to get a proof of posting receipt from the post office. Thus you would be able to show that you had responded to them.


Regarding your not having received previous correspondence - the sender would similarly need to provide evidence of posting the "numerous" requests.