Hospital PCN

RadHimster

I did initially complain to the PALs but they were unfortunately not particularly helpful in this instance. I hadn't thought about mailing the CEO of the hospital directly however and will look into that.

RadHimster

It continues...as to be expected. I've gone through the normal debt collector stage and ignored accordingly. I've now received a letter from Gladstones, it appears genuine as the reference starts with 1..xxxxx.

The letter talks about the fact their client *may* instruct them to take legal action and is using them at the moment, basically, as a debt collector.

As this isn't just a vanilla debt collector and does actually appear to be Gladstones is the recommended approach to reply robustly denying the debt and explaining that the client has been provided evidence on multiple occasions disputing the claim without going into specifics? Or, do you just wait for a proper LBC if they ever went that route?

I've had a browse through the forum but can't see anything much relating to apparently genuine G's letters that aren't LBC's.

Quentin

It's not a letter before court action.

Note use of "may".

Coupon-mad

You can find a reply I wrote, to be adapted by whoever wants to use it, by searching 'Gallstones'.

RadHimster

Coupon, I found your thread and had a read. The letter the OP references is far more wordy than mine. I have attached a copy of the letter I received, it reads more like a debt collector letter. There is no real content to it and looks very roboclaim-esque but it is from G's.

https /drive.google.com/open?id=0BwMC0GFedSBJeDBaRGxSTlVyZEE

I would think a firm response denying debt and outlining the matter to date would be sufficient? I guess it's not an official LBC so I could just ignore it, I feel it looks better to at least acknowledge it though?

Coupon-mad

Yes and no harm in replying - and certainly complaining to the landowners, and to your MP.

Their final paragraph 'advises' you to contact one of the following organisations, then lists none (unless they are on a second page?). What a terrible letter.

You could also look at Johnersh's suggested response to Wright Hassall's similarly misleading 'debt' letters and adapt that one, or some of it, as he is legally qualified and it is based around a planned formal complaint to the SRA.

Found by searching 'Johnersh cathartic' I think.

RadHimster

Well, I've knocked up a response. How does this read to the casual observer?

In response to your letter dated xx/xx/xx. I have attempted to engage with your client numerous times since I received the first letter from them and have outlined my position and provided evidence of a purchased ticket on two separate occasions. At no point during the dialogue between your client and I have they discussed any of the points made and have merely continued with the automated process of demanding payment.

In my last correspondence with your client I stated that I denied any debt was owed. This is still my stance owing to the fact that a ticket was purchased and due to the particulars of the incident which I expect your client will have shared with you. Should your client wish to take this further I will happily defend myself in a small claims court if required. I strongly believe, in this instance, it to be an inappropriate use of the courts but I will not be bullied into paying for something which shouldn’t even exist, especially when evidence has been provided contrary to the claim.

I would also like to highlight a couple of points from your letter which I find misleading.

1: Your letter points out the importance of understanding what a registered judgment against me could mean.

The Court will determine any dispute if proceedings are commenced. In the event that a Judgment is awarded in your client's favour then provided that Judgment is paid promptly there will be no CCJ registered against my name. This is not made clear precisely to prompt the recipient into early payment and to discourage any defence of the action.

2: At £160 the debt sought would appear to be set at a level beyond that which is likely to be recoverable in the small claims court (or at all) and may therefore misstate the correct legal position regarding the recovery of the parking charge in this matter, were your client to be successful.

Any amendments/suggestions are welcome.

Umkomaas

What are you hoping your letter will achieve?

This is the link to the suggested Johnersh letter (he is legally qualified) to fire at WH.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=72802210&postcount=21

RadHimster

Well, I know what I hope it will achieve though I'm under no illusion that it'll actually achieve sweet f.a if I'm honest. I guess I just want to feel like I'm being pro active about it, naivety I suppose.

I did read through that originally and have amended a few bits in a minor fashion to fit my reply. I'm responding to a different letter from Gladstones as opposed to a debt recovery agent writing on solicitor paper, so parts of that response wouldn't make sense.

Coupon-mad

In your letter you have said nothing to stop them in their tracks, so the claim will follow.