Excel PCN from 2013, new letter from BW Legal- help!

LoveNorfolk

Anyone got anything better I can put re statement 4 for the Beavis part? Thanks, I appreciate you're really busy on here giving up your time for free. Not had a call from the CSA yet, debating calling back but it is the guys first day back after weekend so don't want to be rude!

Coupon-mad

Anyone got anything better I can put re statement 4 for the Beavis part?

Which bit do you mean?

LoveNorfolk

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Which bit do you mean, in the SRA complaint?

Yes please. I've spoken to the CSA today saying I wasn't happy with decision and that I wanted to know what they thought not BW Legal, he said there was "a number of issues", I also mentioned them mentioning Beavis in the letter, so he has asked me to email over (using a newly made email address of course!) the further points I want to raise. He said they "should not be using points which are not clearly relevent", ie Beavis just because it won. He is getting in touch with BW after receiving this which I'm doing now telling them to put it on hold, but that I can write to them too if I feel more comfortable doing so, which I will citing the DPA as you mentioned Coupon-mad. Should I wait for the outcome of the CSA before doing the SRA or get that off at same time?

LoveNorfolk

Emailed CSA, will see what happens from that, will send a letter to BW tomorrow or something as I have to go to work now.

Umkomaas

Who is 'CRA'?

Do you mean the 'CSA' (Credit Services Association)', or 'SRA' (Solicitors Regulation Authority?

Starting to get confusing, as the emphasis and focus of each organisation is quite different.

LoveNorfolk

Sorry, getting myself tangled! I have spoken to the CSA regarding further points from BW's decision letter as well as the original complaint, now just need to wait on an outcome. I am requiring help towrite about Beavis in my letter above to the SRA which I'm not sure whether to send now or wait till I hear from the CSA? Sorry!

Coupon-mad

Can you quote the exact paragraph you think might need more work, here on this page in your next reply please? It saves us looking back...!

Redx

LoveNorfolk wrote: »

Sorry, getting myself tangled! I have spoken to the CSA regarding further points from BW's decision letter as well as the original complaint, now just need to wait on an outcome. I am requiring help towrite about Beavis in my letter above to the SRA which I'm not sure whether to send now or wait till I hear from the CSA? Sorry!

and please EDIT your previous posts to the correct acronyms as this thread is being referred to a lot to explain it to others , many of whom dont even know the right acronyms from the wrong ones , lol

thank you

LoveNorfolk

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]This is the statement and following explanation of which that I think needs more work as part of my letter to the SRA and a bit more oomph if anyone can help?

(4) They also make reference to the case of ParkingEye Limited v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 where they say, ''the Supreme Court held that PCN charges serve a legitimate commercial interest and are deemed lawful''. Making the assumption that this along with relevant codes of practice give guidance that £100.00 is a reasonable sum to charge.

[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Statement (4) is absolutely irresponsible. To inform a recipient of a letter about a parking charge which does not in any way match the facts of the Beavis case, and to use this in an attempt to frighten the addressee into thinking that from this one case, all others cannot b beggars belief and again, I was completely misled by this assertion. Consumers are being coerced into paying charges which bear no relation to the circumstances of the fairly unique 'Beavis case', which I am advised the Supreme Court were at pains to 'Tweet' straight after their decision, turned on the specific legitimate interest of the landowner in a particular retail park, based on the clear terms on the signs in that car park alone. My case is nothing like that case. To mention just one clear matter of possible defence open to me (among others), the signs were wholly different and illegible with the terms of the car park not only displayed upon signs that started approximately eight feet up off the ground, but from what could be read, stating contraventions that would be considered a breach of their terms and conditions, including parking in a restricted area, but not giving details of any areas in which this applied. But if I was to believe BW Legal's letter I would have thought - as I initially did, in a panic - that due to the Beavis case, I have no defence and must just pay their client.

******

This is the letter I'm thinking of sending to BW after speaking to the CSA today, the guy said he would be getting in touch with them to tell them to put it on hold whilst they made a decision but said if I felt more comfortable I could also send them a letter.

[/FONT][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, sans-serif]I write in reply to your last letter dated xxxxxx. I regret to inform you that I do not accept your findings in result from the complaint made to the Credit Service Association (CSA). As you know, the CSA investigation is still on going and as such, I cannot consider this complaint resolved until the findings of this are made clear. The CSA have advised that they will contact you to put this complaint on hold until they have completed their own investigation. My position within this dispute remains unchanged. [/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]I require you and your Client to cease processing my data (as the CSA will also request whilst this complaint is in progress), I remind you again as you and your Client appear to ignore this, that your Client does not use POFA (2012) compliant wording and as such means I cannot be pursued for any parking charges your parking operator Client under any applicable law.[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]I am not at all surprised that you as a company, that represents those such as your client, feel that the way in which you conduct yourself is by all means adequate. From this I must inform you that your last letter replying to my CSA complaint did not reach me within the time frame as set out in your own complaints procedure which you kindly enclosed in your letter dated xxxxxxx which was the receipt of the complaint. You stated within that, “we will investigate your complaint and endeavour to send a formal response to you within 4 weeks of receipt of you complaint. If we are unable to provide you with a formal response within this time frame, we will send you an update on the progress of your complaint at this time”. You further state that “we will endeavour to send you a final response to you within 8 weeks of receipt of your complaint [...]”. A response to my complaint from yourselves was not received until 5weeks after the receipt of the complaint, 1 week over your time scale. Also, you mention that “for ease of reference, attached are ways in which you are able to discharge your indebtedness to our client”, this is not included within your letter.[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]I thank you for the photographic evidence as provided by your client in your last letter, which allow me to perfectly point out my grievance to the alleged contravention and balance. [/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Please also treat this letter as a Section 10 Notice under the Data Protection Act (DPA). I expect a response within 21 days and failure to comply with this will result in a complaint to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO).

*****
[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]I have gone back and corrected my posts with the wrong acronyms. Many thanks as always for your help!
[/FONT]

LoveNorfolk

I am ommitting the bit about photographic evidence from the letter I'm sending BW so that I have that for any further correspondence, so posting as above without that bit.