B W Legal

dizco

Hi All

I know this has been covered a few times in previous threads, but I would appreciate some advice.

In December 2010 I received a PCN from Excel concerning an alleged parking contravention. I appealed and lost. Following advice from the MSE board, I ignored the reminders and chasing letters.

I recently received a letter from BW Legal to advise they were pursuing the claim on Excel's behalf to the tune of £154.

I sent back the following letter:

"I deny any debt to Excel Parking Services and/or yourselves (BW Legal).

To clarify, I was the registered keeper of that vehicle at the time (not the driver), and as the alleged parking event was before The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 your client has no right to pursue me for payment. In addition to this, Excel Parking Services Ltd do not use POFA compliant wording in their notices to keeper.
I therefore suggest you and Excel take this matter up with the driver of the vehicle at the time of the allegation. I am unaware of who it may have been as the event appears to be 6 years ago and I cannot be expected to remember exactly this long afterwards, nor am I under any obligation to do so.
As I dispute this charge and consider this matter now closed, I demand that you do not contact me further and refer the matter back to your client Excel Parking with the following comments:

The Data Protection Act requires that Excel Parking Ltd now delete my records. They cannot hold a keeper liable.

I have never consented to my personal details and data being shared by Excel and I revoke any permission they may have incorrectly given you. Your communication on their behalf is basically harassment and this is causing distress and upset to both myself and my elderly mother. I object to my personal data being processed in this manner without my permission.

I therefore request Excel remove all my details within 21 days of this notice under Section 10 of the Data Protection Act as I believe they are clearly in breach of section 1 of the Act.

Also, the Civil Procedure Rules are quite clear that the £54 charges for “Legal Costs" cannot be recovered in the Small Claims Court. In the unlikely event that your client has actually paid these costs, they are therefore none of my concern.
I will not, under any circumstances make any payment to Excel Parking or your company. This letter constitutes a demand for an immediate cancellation of the Parking Charge. The claim is denied in its entirety. I assert that I am not liable to the Claimant for the sum claimed, or any amount at all. Any further communications, other than to confirm you will not be pursuing me for this charge, will be treated as continued harassment. I consider this matter closed.
Should any further correspondence be forthcoming from yourselves I will be left with no choice to report BW Legal to the SRA (Solicitors' Regulatory Authority) and the CSA (Credit Services Association) for the various non-compliances, breaches and misleading/threatening information contained within your letter as detailed above.
I am also sending this letter to you today via registered post, however please take this email as my response to your demand within 16 days, from the date of your correspondence (11th July, 2016)".

I then received a letter back, stating that "as the driver's details were not forthcoming, Excel reasonably presumes you were the driver" and referred me to Elliott v Loake.

They also go on to say they are not in breach of Data Protection, and provide a clause from the DVLAs Release of Information document. In addition to this they state that under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, the course of conduct they have carried out is deemed reasonable. They state that £54 is a reasonable fee, and gave me 7 days to pay in full.

I ignored this, and have now received a letter threatening court if I don't pay by the end of the month.

I must admit, I'm beginning to crack under the pressure, but I'd like to know what you feel I should do next, as I'm presuming court papers are now imminent,

Any advice you can offer would be greatly appreciated.

Redx

they are, so you should respond with a typical GAN letter (see pepipoo) that denies the debt yet again , its letter tennis

search BW LEGAL £54 to see the others

I believe some GAN responses tell them where they can shove Elliott vs Loake

read this as it may help you

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=107293&st=20

if an MCOL does come, then its follow the same path as all the others in the same boat at the moment , so have a read of the kayleigh thread where HO87 posted about the MCOL stage too

you are not alone , there are dozens of you going through it, probably many more, especially this BW LEGAL stage

they have 6 years to try a court claim , hence why you got a letter as they are paying a monkey peanuts to go through old invoices

as its pre POFA2012, that will be another defence point

The_Deep

Let them take you to court. E v L was a criminal case involving a hit and run where the police obtained forsenic evidence that the respondent was the driver. He also lied to the police.

BWL know this and by quoting it are attempting to obtain monies to which their client has no entitlement, which is/may be fraud.

Complain in the strongest terms to the SRA, use the "F" word.

http://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/problems/report-solicitor.page

beamerguy

Mr Prankster says this, many have seen it already

"BW Legal are therefore early contenders for The Prankster's "Most Incompetent Solicitors of The Year" annual award."

Sooner or later the SRA may wake up to BW Legal.

Anyone know what the "W" stands for ???

dizco

Thank you so much. I'll get on it.