URGENT: UKPC & SCS Law

Immy_007

Need to post this tomorrow fiirst class so is the letter above sufficent? anythig to add?

Coupon-mad

Yes just send it and keep proof. And start reading lots of UKPC/SCS court defences, in readiness.

Your link didn't work, we can't see it.

Immy_007

i posted the letter on Monday 6th March First class and kept proof of posting

KeithP

Your link still doesn't work.

Immy_007

https://imgur.com/a/8rjY3

beamerguy

There is no way you can accept being threatened
with bailiffs, attachment to earnings, by these financial
thugs ... IT'S NOT EVEN GONE TO COURT YET

And then they talk about the Beavis case to try and scare
you .... the fact is the Beavis case has no bearing
whatsoever to do with you.

From what I read from their letter, they have not tended
an ounce of proof of their claim other to say you over
stayed

If that is how they think the new procedure works, its
time for SCS to start doing their homework

Nobody can accept this rubbish and that is why you
MUST send copies of this letter to Sir Greg Knight who
proposed the new private members parking bill

https://www.parliament.uk/biographies/commons/sir-greg-knight/1200

Nobody should put up with with such threats, they are
highly misleading and menacing ????

The SRA should be highly ashamed of SCS as they are
not in the interests of the public

These were the methods of the Kray Twins

I understand why UKPC live in the sewers, as they are known
scammers and fakers but for SCS to stoop so low gives a very
bad name for real solicitors

[Deleted User]

The acceptability of the SCS correspondence lies in whether there is use of the word MAY obtain judgment and MAY be able to take the following steps.

If the letter states expressly or impliedly that any of those steps WILL happen, it is misleading as to the debt process and may be in breach of SRA guidance.
http://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/code-of-conduct/guidance/warning-notices/Debt-recovery-work-and-relationships-with-debt-recovery-businesses--Warning-notice.page

I set out some of the SRA guidance in reply a wright hassall letter that was doing the rounds a little while back. WH appear to have subsequently changed that precedent Others have not

Coupon-mad

I would say it does on the second page, imply that those steps WILL happen, because it says to avoid these steps, you must contact someone called Abdullah at UKPC and pay.

To any reasonable interpretation, the two bullet points above that demand for money paragraph on page two, are the 'steps' that the letter says can only be avoided by paying UKPC.

[Deleted User]

@Coupon I failed to scroll down, it does qualify it - probably enough -

It states IF judgment is secured AND IF you don't pay the judgment debt.

Bet their sign doesn't say they'll charge £60 per referral to debt recovery though. Most don't. In which case the letter is misleading that way. And if it is a letter before action, I do hope they have provided all the documents they should have done (I suspect not)

beamerguy

Johnersh wrote: »

Most don't. In which case the letter is misleading that way. And if it is a letter before action, I do hope they have provided all the documents they should have done (I suspect not)

It's not just misleading, it is menacing and threatening and
what would be expected from back street loan sharks

You are a solicitor, do you think the SRA was set up to
protect a Kray Twins operation ????