MyParkingCharge.co.uk

Coupon-mad

Yes that helps your defence in the end, if they proceed with a claim...I seem to recall you are at debt collector stage (the thread is long - but keep all replies here!).

Clearly the location they are talking about doesn't exist... hehehe!

jam1991

UPDATE:

Had the following letter through the post on Friday 20th October - letter is dated 11/10/2017...
Any response needed please?

What can I expect next?

KeithP

If the debt is not repaid in full within 14 days of the date of this letter, we anticipate being instructed to commence County Court proceedings without further notice.

"we anticipate being instructed to..."?

Clearly not a letter before claim.

Now if they had written "we will...", that would be different.

Perhaps maybe you should think about heading towards considering ignoring this letter.

Umkomaas

Send this from Johnersh (a lawyer). It won’t change things immediately, but it lets them know you are ahead of the game on this and you won’t be fooled by ZZPS utilising WH letterheads to harass.

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

What can I expect next?

Are you following other ZZPS/WH threads? Why do you think we would know every single stage of every single parking company/debt collector/law firm case at any single time to respond to any and every ad hoc and random question with precise information?

Surely you’d know better than us on this? If it was me I’d be all over ZZPS/WH cases across the forum like a rash if they were threatening me.

Coupon-mad

http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/pd_pre-action_conduct

Updated: Friday, 17 February 2017

WH are directing people to the old CPR Rules, in a letter dated October, AFTER these were replaced for debt claims?

Surely the link should be:

http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/pdf/protocols/pre-action-protocol-for-debt-claims.pdf

The letter is atrocious and this plus the OUT Of DATE link is well worth a fresh complaint to the SRA.

[Deleted User]

WH are directing people to the old CPR Rules, in a letter dated October, AFTER these were replaced for debt claims?

This stuff is great. Bank it. When Wright Hassall respond in their template, telling you not to use internet template letters, you get to point out that they appear to have failed to update their case management systems and to refer them to the new protocols that you now expect them to comply with.

It's the type of documentation that needs to go into the bundle to help present a case for unreasonable conduct of the litigation.

Coupon-mad

I think every current WH letter (at this stage) is like this one...seen it several times now, in October.

We really need to seize on this and use it.

jam1991

Thank you all for your replies, I really do appreciate your time and expertise.

Is the general consensus to not reply to WH at this stage?

Coupon-Mad shall I proceed with a complaint to the SRA regarding this now?

Thanks all again for your continued assistance.

Coupon-mad

Is the general consensus to not reply to WH at this stage?

Errmmmm...no.

Umkomaas post #65 tells you what to send them, and where to find it.

Then Johnersh tells you what to reply with, when they respond with their template.

RobinofLoxley

KeithP wrote: »

"we anticipate being instructed to..."?

Clearly not a letter before claim.

Now if they had written "we will...", that would be different.

Perhaps maybe you should think about heading towards considering ignoring this letter.

WH clearly claim their letter is a LBC in the sentence,

"This letter is a Letter Before Claim pursuant to the Practice Direction on Pre Action Conduct and Protocols, copies of which may be found at......"

Then as CM has pointed out you are directed to a website for the old pre 1st October regulations.

Coupon-mad wrote: »

I think every current WH letter (at this stage) is like this one...seen it several times now, in October.

We really need to seize on this and use it.

Exactly, do you think the SRA should be receiving a deluge of complaints from the recipients of these letters, regarding the misleading statement.