MyParkingCharge.co.uk

Coupon-mad

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

Yes, I do agree. It is inexcusable.

jam1991

Is this suitable to email to WH as advised in post #65?

Thank you.

I refer to your correspondence of 11/10/2017. I wish to make a complaint on the basis that your letter is threatening, misleading as to the law and an abuse of the process of debt recovery. I refer to SRA Warning Notice 11/06/2013 ("the Warning Notice").
To the extent that the correspondence may have been sent by a third party, the letter is on Wright Hassall letterhead and the firm is responsible for the content. I wish to raise the following points:

1. Your letter states you or agents on behalf of your client will seek to obtain a CCJ which may affect
1.1. My ability to obtain credit
1.2. My ability to borrow funds
1.3. My ability to obtain employment
1.4. Be subject to bailiff enforcement or an attachment of earnings order.

All of the above points are misleading as to the position and may impair access to justice. The Court will determine any dispute if proceedings are commenced. In the event that a Judgment is awarded in your client's favour none of the above will occur provided that the Judgment is paid promptly. This is not made clear precisely to prompt the recipient into early payment and to discourage any defence of the action (however meritorious).

2. The full extent of Court enforcement is set out within the letter in a manner which is aggressive and intimidation without making the process of debt recovery clear (in clear disregard of the Warning Notice).

3. Your correspondence gives rise to no consideration of the recipient's position or any defence of the proposed action or consideration of negotiated settlement, only payment of the debt, which is neither admitted nor proven.

4. 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.

5. The letter received appears to come from an individual who purports to be Head of Debt Recovery at Wright Hassall. Despite this, he is not listed on the firm's website and is not a registered solicitor. It is unclear as to what his position is or if he exists. It is further not clear that Wright Hassall have appropriately represented their status as required by the Warning Notice.

We expect you to accurately and openly represent your authority/status in all communications, and to convey in those communications the correct legal position with regard to debts and the debt recovery process.

I look forward to hearing from you.

HeatonGuy

Possibly useful if something is added like:

Your correspondence additionally does not in any way meet the requirements of the Pre-Action Protocol on Debt Claims from 1 October 2017.

Coupon-mad

jam1991 wrote: »

Is this suitable to email to WH as advised in post #65?

Send that as it is, no editing or adding anything about the protocols (yet).

Then - when you get their template reply that you can easily find on other threads - do as Johnersh explained, as a deliberate second line of attack.

jam1991

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Send that as it is, no editing or adding anything about the protocols (yet).

Then - when you get their template reply that you can easily find on other threads - do as Johnersh explained, as a deliberate second line of attack.

Sent as advised via, will await response. Thank you.

jam1991

UPDATE: Received this email back.

Is it correct to reply to this giving details, to get a template reply from them?



TIA

beamerguy

Another Tim Hawker special using pimped out
letterhead of Wright Hassall

Nearly everyday, people are told NOT to give
personal data to scammers

THAT APPLIES TO YOU AS WELL

jam1991

beamerguy wrote: »

Another Tim Hawker special using pimped out
letterhead of Wright Hassall

Nearly everyday, people are told NOT to give
personal data to scammers

THAT APPLIES TO YOU AS WELL

Appreciate your reply, was just a query.

As I was following 'Umkomaas' and 'Coupon-mad' advice with regards to sending the response above, and then awaiting their reply, to then respond again regarding the protocols.

Obviously the expected response is not going to occur now given they want me to confirm details they already have...

jam1991

Is anyone able to answer the above? Do I respond with my known details to get the predicted reaction/response?

nosferatu1001

Id jsut tell them that you already have my details, I dont want to use an insecure method - email - to hand over confidential information they already have.