Elite Management, PCN, ZZPS, Wright Hassall harassment

Coupon-mad

No it doesn't. A solicitor acting as a debt collector is just a debt collector. A letter. Ignore it.

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=104542

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5035663

Google it. Covered hundreds of times. Everyone gets that letter.

dazster

King_Mustard wrote: »

"just a"

Sounds important

What, "debt collector"? :rotfl: They aren't important, they aren't bailiffs, they have no powers and can't do anything, they will not "send the boys round", they are worthless, toothless low-life scum. You should treat the dog **** on your shoe with more respect.

fil_cad

King_Mustard wrote: »

This came through today.

Should we continue to ignore them?

Stand up to the scum, they are the filth off the earth, don't cave in and fill up their filthy bank account at your expence.

Coupon-mad

Covered and ignored soooo many times on forums:

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=wright+hassall+letter+site%3Aforums.moneysavingexpert.com (you have to close the gap before using this link)

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=wright+hassall+letter+site%3Aforums.pepipoo.com

You are far from alone in just laughing at such letters.

But if they then send a 'Letter before Claim' you should then respond and get advice here. Mostly, it just goes quiet now and this is only Elite who are not the brightest legal brains/not organised with evidence.

Half_way

If you are genuinely worried about it, you could go for the landowner with a put up or shut up approach, however a little more detail is required:

where was the vehicle parked ( residential/shop/retail park etc)?
if residential, was the vehicle parked in an assigned space?

if you can answer that then advice on weather its worth going after the landowner or not can be issued.

The_Deep

I am afraid that WH have now turned themselves into a laughing stock. What has happened to their fine old reputation.

Giant_Hogweed

I'm impressed someone from WH has actually been named and signed the letter. The one I got jusy had Wright Hassell in a squiggly font as a signature .

King_Mustard

Another letter.

They don't give up :undecided

Coupon-mad

Similar advice as on the other thread about a WH LBC today/yesterday, easy enough to find. It was a CP Plus thread about this same letter.

Your response needs to be robust, written as the keeper but slightly different from the other thread because the PCN 'admin centre' Notice to Keeper is trying to hold a keeper liable (unlike CP Plus ones). It still fails to state the warning about keeper liability properly though - it misstates the 28 day period which is fundamental and that wording (required under paragraph 8 of Schedule 4) is prescribed by statute & cannot be paraphrased.

So devide your own version of a response to WH by changing the CP Plus one already suggested yesterday, or write your own or find one on pepipoo forum written by Gan. There are loads of forum threads about this letter & how to reply.

King_Mustard

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Similar advice as on the other thread about a WH LBC today/yesterday, easy enough to find. It was a CP Plus thread about this same letter.

Your response needs to be robust, written as the keeper but slightly different from the other thread because the PCN 'admin centre' Notice to Keeper is trying to hold a keeper liable (unlike CP Plus ones). It still fails to state the warning about keeper liability properly though - it misstates the 28 day period which is fundamental and that wording (required under paragraph 8 of Schedule 4) is prescribed by statute & cannot be paraphrased.

So devide your own version of a response to WH by changing the CP Plus one already suggested yesterday, or write your own or find one on pepipoo forum written by Gan. There are loads of forum threads about this letter & how to reply.

But aren't some others above suggesting I ignore them?

I'm a little confused.