6 Years n and I've Got a PCN...?

The_Deep

Oh dear, when iis the SRA going to put a stop to this.

Herzlos

Definintely complain to the SRA that they are still lying about EvL despite judges and POPLA ruling against it being applicable. They know it's rubbish, and it's a bare faced attempt at deception.

pappa_golf

why bother replying , the letter from them gave you 7 days , less a couple for posting . the thing times out next Saturday

catfunt

If that is your real name signed at the bottom of your last post, I strongly suggest that you edit your post and remove it.

pappa_golf

Question?

how long does it take to issue court papers , yup online , but is it instant or do they go in a pile then allocated a number , ie: if B+W send it back to muppet and co , next monday , will muppet and co have it all up and running by friday?

Quentin

Yes they can get the action up and running within 24 hours.


But if they are on the ball with their monitoring here then unless Jim removes his name from the thread then they will act within the 6 years, leaving Jim with the extra hassle of having to defend a claim!!

beamerguy

paulweller wrote: »

And in their closing paragraph state:

As details of the driver not been forthcoming to suggest otherwise, our client, in the absence of the drivers details, reasonably presumes you were the driver and we refer you to the case of Elliott v Loake [1982].

What part of >>>> "Elliott v Loake is not relevant" <<<<<
do BWLegal NOT UNDERSTAND.

It is amazing that the SRA allow this bunch to continue with misleading statements ???

BUT WAIT ..... next letter will be a 40% off november scammers discount ?????

Such an un-professional firm of solicitors

pappa_golf

by which time , the 6 yrs will have elapsed and a formal complaint can be sent to the SRA , for trying to demand money after 6 yrs

paulweller

Thanks everyone for the input.

Quick question (s)

1. Their letter is dated 2nd Nov - I received it Friday 4th Nov - It states "contact us with 7 days from the date of this letter..." - BUT that wastes Sat/Sun so does my response need to be with them by 9th?

2. Does my response letter look ok or should I put in something about the Loake ruling being prior to the alleged offence etc...

The_Slithy_Tove

paulweller wrote: »

should I put in something about the Loake ruling being prior to the alleged offence etc...

When such a "ruling" is made is irrelevant. Simply state that their reliance on EvL is untenable, and they know it. Quote the relevant case that can be found on the Prankster blog.