First post Advice needed please

Fruitcake

Did you send the appeal to CEL suggested to you by C-M over a month ago? What was their reply?

No you do not ignore letters from a solicitor. You must engage with them each and every time.

Redx

Beemer2010 wrote: »

Update:
I have now had a letter from Wright Hassall Solicitors.

Do I just ignore these letters.

are you sure ?

check the letter thoroughly to ensure that it is from WH and not ZZPS pretending to be WH

it could be from ZZPS on WH headed notepaper, so double check WHO it came from and WHO to contact

if its actually from WH , respond as if its an LBC

if its from ZZPS on WH bog paper , IGNORE IT


either CEL or WH on behalf of CEL may try an LBC or an MCOL

ZZPS can do nothing at all, powerless debt collectors

you are going to have to learn the difference because they deliberately dont make it easy

YES you IGNORE these letters if the SOURCE is ZZPS (or any DCA)

NO you do not IGNORE these letters if its a real letter from WH acting on behalf of CEL (not ZZPS)

Coupon-mad

I have tried an search on the forum for Wright Hassall but the results seem to be about different companies.

I hope that didn't stop you reading the results, as long as you only searched the parking forum here and the companies being discussed were all parking firms. These cases are all the same:

https://bmpa.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/203747112-Wright-Hassall

The WH letter is just a debt collector letter everyone gets. It's never touched a solicitor's desk, it's a ZZPS letter.

Do I just ignore these letters. I am now very worried about my position.

But everyone gets these. If you aren't reading parking forum results telling you this, then I can understand your worry, but once you start reading all the zillions of other threads exactly like yours you will see how we know what we know.

What do you think the worst case scenario is in your position? I'll tell you, worst case would be CEL try a small claim and you defend badly and lose, and so you would have to pay about £160ish and no CCJ. No effect on credit rating, nothing bad, you'd pay in the end. Big deal.

Now listen when we tell you that we have NEVER LOST a defended case v CEL because we help people defend well. CEL give up and the cases are stayed. Don't believe me? Search the forum for 'CEL defence Schwartz' and 'CEL stayed' and show me one where it actually went to hearing - there are NONE.

Beemer2010

Thanks for the reply Coupon-Mad. It helps me a great deal as far as worry goes.
I did try to read quite a few of the forum threads, but it is hard work when most of what I am reading I do not understand.
I will not respond to the WH letters then.
Unfortunately I have more than 1 PCN and s the amount is a bit more than £160ish.
I looked at the link in the past above and see this "If you get one of these complain to the Solicitors Regulation Authority". Do I need to do this?

Thank you again for your help.

Redx

its the ZZPS that you do not respond to

if you get any letters from WH themselves you should respond

there is a difference , which you should know by now

you can complain to the SRA if you wish to , as its a type of misrepresentation

Coupon-mad

Yes you could complain to the SRA about the WH letter but TBH it won't make any difference.

Beemer2010

Thanks again Coupon-mad.

Today I have received an email from the facilities manager:

Dear Mr **************

I am sorry to hear that you appear to have had a parking charge notice issued to you at the Fairfield General Hospital. With regard to appeals and payments for parking charge notices, there is a clear process for this by contacting Civil Enforcement directly. As Civil Enforcement Ltd hold all of the information relating to each charge notice issued, including photographs, they are best placed to deal with any appeals or further queries. Having spoken to Civil Enforcement regarding this notice, they have also advised that you have 4 further parking charge notices all issued for not displaying a valid parking ticket.

We selected Civil Enforcement as their approach to parking enforcement takes into account extenuating circumstances and also the hospital environment, but you need to appeal within the required timescales and also quote the relevant parking charge notice (PCN) number. Please find further information attached on making appeal and payments as appropriate. This information is also available on our website, pat.nhs.uk/getting-here/car-parking.htm].

If you have received a notice to keeper letter or a debt recovery letter relating to a parking charge notice you will be beyond the appeals procedure point. We therefore strongly advise you to contact Civil Enforcement or their debt recovery agents to seek to agree an appropriate repayment plan to resolve the situation’.

Thanks

*********************

Do I now need to take it up with CEL?
Thanks again in advance.

Edit: If I need to respond to WH Solicitors what tack do I take? TIA

Redx

I would write back to this facilities manager who has given you the brush off and point out that 2.5 YEARS ago Jeremy Hunt stated the position in the House of Commons that the correct principles should be followed and that the TRUST are jointly and severally liable for the actions of their contractors

then point them at the current guidelines and ask why they are failing those guidelines set by their peers

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nhs-patient-visitor-and-staff-car-parking-principles/nhs-patient-visitor-and-staff-car-parking-principles

state that you do not accept their reply in the light of those guidelines and should it go to court you will be calling them into court to explain their failures under the 2.5 year old guidelines when it is clear they have a responsibility under them and cannot just hand it off to CEL

CEL wont deal with you as they have handed it to ZZPS and eventually they may pass it to a law firm to deal with

its called being at an "impasse", where neither side will budge

as for your last question, if you get an LBC from WH , you treat is as an LBC and write back refuting the claims being made (same as people have done with all the other LBC letters from either WH or BW LEGAL , or MIAH or any other legal practice)

so if an LBC arrives, you rebut the details in your replies , denying the alleged debt and adding lines from previous LBC letters published on here , so its clear you have done no research on replying to an LBC from a ppc or more likely from a solicitor , despite there being scores of similar issues on here regarding people like GLADSTONES who issue them daily like confetti

there is even a sticky thread by lazydaisy on LBC matters, although it is outdated and hasnt been brought up to date for some time , it still spells out the basics , as do threads about BW LEGAL over the last 12 months too

Beemer2010

Redx wrote: »

are you sure ?

check the letter thoroughly to ensure that it is from WH and not ZZPS pretending to be WH

it could be from ZZPS on WH headed notepaper, so double check WHO it came from and WHO to contact

if its actually from WH , respond as if its an LBC

if its from ZZPS on WH bog paper , IGNORE IT


either CEL or WH on behalf of CEL may try an LBC or an MCOL

ZZPS can do nothing at all, powerless debt collectors

you are going to have to learn the difference because they deliberately dont make it easy

YES you IGNORE these letters if the SOURCE is ZZPS (or any DCA)

NO you do not IGNORE these letters if its a real letter from WH acting on behalf of CEL (not ZZPS)

Thank you very much for the replies.
I have looked at the letter again carefully and am wondering how I can tell if it is a genuine WH LLP letter of a ZZPS one. How do I tell? What am I looking for? I obviously do not want to make a mistake with this.

Edit:
I have replied to the email as you suggested.
I have done a search on the phone number they give to call them on in the letter and it seems that it is a WH phone number.

Redx

post a redacted copy (no personal info or references , cover them up) on tinypic or photobucket and add a dead url link to the scan/picture (change http to hxxp)

then somebody here will sort the link out and also take a look, because its clear you have no idea which it actually is (they do not make it easy to spot, deliberately I might add)

the words "may" and "our client" can be giveaways

the phone numbers to call are another (which you have now checked)

you have to ferret around a lot as its "spot the difference"