old ticket being chased!

Redx

the only knowledge I have of this is my aunties adress was blacklisted years ago when her live back at home son was in serious debt and she could not get credit cards etc, even though she and her husband had spotless records

I agree it may be different now , but I cannot discount that possibility from existing , but thanks for the info as things may have changed

I believe the OP is playing with fire on this one

you only have to annoy a judge by facts that should have been dealt with prior to a court case for the judge to dismiss the defendant and judge in favour of the claimant , if only to teach the defendant a lesson in not being a smart alec

my son Steven used to get payment demands incorrectly addressed to Stephen , he still opened them and still had to pay them and it took months to get the name corrected on the paperwork (council tax was one of them) , but he was still accountable and liable for the money owed

he also had payslips issued in both variants and the inland revenue wanted proof that it was one and the same single employee, not 2 employees with similar names , lol

mattpc

It would indeed be stupid to risk the address being blacklisted.. However, if the worst happened and the case was lost, with that incorrect name. If the CCJ was settled within a month then it wouldn't go on the non existent persons credit score anyway...

It seems to me, either ignore it and see what happens. Worst case, pay if only to avoid risking problems with the address.

Or.. Reply without giving a name stating my defence.

Redx

if its an LBC there is no way that you should be issuing any defence , as the driver should not be revealed , plus you are NOT the RK , and what you have stated so far is no legal defence anyway

the partner should be sending it back as "nobody of that name living at this address"

then if an LBC comes in the correct name , the partner should respond to that LBC using one of GAN,s recent reply letters from pepipoo (not a defence at this stage either)

if the MCOL arrives in the partners correct name , only the partner can put in their defence , not you , which is a holding (skeleton) defence

ie:- this is about your partner , not you , especially if the incident was before october 2012 (pre POFA2012)

at this point I dont think you understand the situation because you have blinkers on and are obsessing about the incorrect name

this thread is at a similar stage https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5503028 although it may not be exactly the same scenario

dazster

Redx wrote: »

if not , a court claim will arrive in the name of the RK

That is very, very unlikely. Even with ParkingEye, ignorers run only a 1:10 risk of receiving a court claim, with all other companies it's much, much lower.

No-one has yet asked the OP the crucial question: he talks about the "event" being years ago, but how many years? We are certainly seeing pre-POFA cases being chased by BW Legal at the moment, and the only advice for those is "keep on ignoring".

n.b. the Credit Services Agency has just upheld a complaint about BW Legal sending misleading letters.

dazster

Redx wrote: »

the only knowledge I have of this is my aunties adress was blacklisted years ago when her live back at home son was in serious debt and she could not get credit cards etc, even though she and her husband had spotless records

I agree it may be different now , but I cannot discount that possibility from existing , but thanks for the info as things may have changed

It is indeed different now. Your credit record cannot be affected by the credit record of anyone you happen to share an address with.

Redx wrote: »

I believe the OP is playing with fire on this one

Hardly a roaring conflagration. A sputtering match at the most.

Redx wrote: »

you only have to annoy a judge by facts that should have been dealt with prior to a court case for the judge to dismiss the defendant and judge in favour of the claimant , if only to teach the defendant a lesson in not being a smart alec

Very, very unlikely ever to be put before a judge. Also, we don't know how wrong the name is: it must be pretty wrong because the OP said they only opened it by accident!

No-one is obliged to open incorrectly addressed/delivered mail just in case it contains something relevant/serious, in fact it's illegal to open someone else's mail, even if it came through your letter box (Postal Services Act 2000)! So if this name is so wrong that it appears not to be that of anyone resident at the address then a judge certainly should not expect a resident to open it and deal with it! The correct approach would be return to sender.

mattpc

It's 2014 and the surname is missing from the letter.

They are demanding so much money that to settle now would only be £100 less than letting it go to court and losing. Obviously it would be stupid to ignore a court process but I'm certainly not proposing to do that.

I would like to say though that I'm not a smart alec and I don't need teaching a lesson thank you. :A

Herzlos

So it's a partial/incorrect name, rather than addressed to the wrong person?

dazster

OK, so that's that clarified, it's post-POFA. And I don't see how anything that is missing a surname could be considered validly served.

Are you sure what you have is a LBC? Does it expressly say so? Does it categorically state that they will begin legal action, or does it use weasel words such as they may begin action, or that they may seek their client's instructions or some such rot?

bod1467

dazster wrote: »

in fact it's illegal to open someone else's mail, even if it came through your letter box (Postal Services Act 2000)!

This has been discussed many times, and is incorrect. It is NOT illegal to open mail addressed to another name at your address; it is only illegal to do so if you then use the contents of the mail to the detriment of the intended recipient.

Case in point ... we had a letter recently to our address to someone unknown to us. (Never known at our address - we've had the house since new - and not a name of any of our current or former neighbours). I opened the letter to find it was from the Bank of Scotland regarding ISA interest changes. I took the letter to the bank so they could update their records, and in case it was someone trying to use our address for nefarious purposes.

I committed no crime.

dazster

bod1467 wrote: »

This has been discussed many times, and is incorrect. It is NOT illegal to open mail addressed to another name at your address; it is only illegal to do so if you then use the contents of the mail to the detriment of the intended recipient.

The offence occurs when the "postal packet" is opened,what anyone does subsequently is irrelevant.