Letter after LBC Wright Hassall

Coupon-mad

safarmuk wrote: »

No sooner asked than done!
http://ibb.co/dZDMOk

OK so they are acting as 'debt collectors' and have not said they have assigned the 'debt' but still send that email to Steve Clark, David Dunford and Wright Hassall, with the attachments mentioned.

And then wait. Don't just chase up David Dunford, send that complaint as drafted, to all three parties.

harp17

Ok here's what has happened in response to Coupon-Mad's letter (sent 21/09) 　

It looks like Wright Hassall have backed off and the BPA email says I have been granted a POPLA number.　

I would really appreciate your advice of what to do next. I guess I now need to follow the POPLA appeals process. Would you also contact MIL to advise them it has gone back to Appeal - or just ignore this debt collection letter as normal? I have also heard nothing further from David Dunford　

20/09 Second Letter from MIL Collections, threating legal action　

28/09 Email from BPA explaining the results of their investigation - Back to POPLA　

28/09 Letter from Wright Hassall (dated 26/09)　

29/09 Email from LCM re POPLA number.......continued

nosferatu1001

Ignore MIL
Get otgether a POPLA appeal. Loads to pick from. Show us what you have

Usually around 4000 words.

harp17

Sorry for delay had a few probs with my IP address??

hxxp://ibbico/g03756
hxxp://ibbico/kkpEkb


Can someone 'make live' the links for me please?

Coupon-mad

I can't see those links but it may just be this PC.

Just reminding myself about the complaint sent to the BPA and WH, LOL, this one was fun:

Coupon-mad wrote: »

I would write back to WH as well:




Dear Sirs,

FTAO - Tim Hawker - re your ref xxxxxxxxx (Local Parking Security/ZZPS/PCN xxxxxxx)

With reference to your recent letter, the contents of which are noted.

Before I send a copy to the SRA with a formal complaint about your firm's conduct, perhaps you could explain:

- how your communications can be in accordance with "Annex B" to the Practice Direction - Pre-Action Conduct, when this does not exist? I will be interested in your reply and explanation about how this does not mislead a consumer, an unrepresented litigant in person.

- why your communications directly and significantly conflict with those from your client?

You say ''we are unable to refer your request to our client to issue a POPLA code'' because you say I did not appeal within the ''correct timeframe''. However, at the same time as your letters of unwarranted harassment were arriving, I made a formal complaint to the British Parking Association about the lack of a POPLA code following my earlier appeal, (complaint ref BPA-11904) who replied thus:

''We have contacted the operator who have advised that an appeal rejection letter (containing a POPLA verification Code) was issued to you on 18th march 2017. The operator have provided a copy of this correspondence, which I have attached for your reference.''

And LPS, in their infinite wisdom when scurrying to brush the BPA complaint under the carpet, have mocked up a letter purportedly posted in March, with my address on it. However, your clients have been so sloppy as to leave the original salutation on the letter they used to 'create' my purported letter, such that it starts ''Dear Maria Mannan''. I do not know any Maria Mannan but it seems to me she was a March victim who never used her POPLA code, which has now been painted as if it was mine.

In view of the above, are you still ''happy'' that Wright Hassall has not misled any party?

And are the clients LPS still ''happy'' as to their communications and conduct in this case?

Are ZZPS ''happy'' with their conduct too? I would be less than pleased, in your position.

As the letters from Wright Hassall were issued in your name, I take it that you personally take responsibility for the contents? As you appear to be conducting the case and asserting Wright Hassall are authorised to act for the client, yet you are not yourself legally qualified, who is your supervising Solicitor in this instance?

Finally, when replying, kindly explain why my data was been passed to MIL Collections, a notorious firm infamous for sending misleading communications suggesting they have 'purchased' parking debts. Who shared my data with MIL, and on whose authority? Why have I not received a formal letter of assignment and why has your client wantonly disregarded the KADOE rules in respect of the DVLA data-sharing restrictions?

I have copied this to the DVLA, who are already investigating the chain of events in this case, and the BPA who I ask to swiftly investigate with more tenacity than demonstrated thus far, the mock-up letter with the unused ''Ms Mannan'' POPLA code, created by your client recently and never in fact posted to me in March, or at all. The letter is very clearly a false instrument, and your confirmation that no POPLA code was issued to me, will assist to expose the truth of the matter, which I don't expect will escape Mr Dunford (DVLA) or Mr Clark (BPA).

I believe it is reasonable to expect your substantive reply within 14 days of this letter.

yours faithfully,



(your name)


attached:
Wright Hassall Letter re 'Annex B' and 'no POPLA code issued'
BPA email reply
LPC's mock-up letter, leaving the old salutation of ''Ms Mannan''
MIL letter

copy to:

david.dunford@dvla.gsi.gov.uk

and

steve.c@britishparking.co.uk