BW Legal Letter of Claim

sproutyrouty

Good evening,

I know there is similar threads which i have already read but everyones situation is slightly different.
Back in 2016 i appealed to BW Legal after they threatened legal proceedings, from advice from this forum from my previous thread in 2016 i sent this letter.

Dear BW Legal,

Complaints

Please send me a copy of your complaints procedure.

I wish to raise the following complaints, which I believe are failures to abide by the codes of conduct of the Credit Services Association (CSA), Solicitors Regulatory Authority (SRA) and Financial Conduct Association (FCA), all of which you are members of or regulated by.

1) In your letter you state. "the balance due includes our clients initial legal costs of £54.00 which are detailed in the car park terms and condition."

I do not believe this is true. Please therefore provide an explanation as to why you stated charges of £54 are detailed in the car park terms and conditions, and a full copy of those terms and conditions.

Providing false information is against the Credit Services Association code of practice.
1.y. communicate with customers fairly and transparently, and not intentionally mislead them
1.aa. treat customers fairly and not subject customers (or their authorised representatives) to aggressive practices, or conduct which is deceitful, oppressive, unfair or improper, whether lawful or not
10.k only impose such costs and interest on customers as it is lawfully entitled

Additionally, the Solicitors code of practice clearly forbids adding a charge which is not legally recoverable:

http://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/handbook/

SRA | SRA Handbook - | Solicitors Regulation Authority
https://www.sra.org.uk
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) regulates solicitors in England and Wales. Report a solicitor, check a solicitor's record or learn what to expect from your solicitor. Protecting consumers of legal services

IB(11.8) demanding anything for yourself or on behalf of your client, that is not legally recoverable, such as when you are instructed to collect a simple debt, demanding from the debtor the cost of the letter of claim since it cannot be said at that stage that such a cost is legally recoverable;

BW Legal will know that it has been held countless times that when instructed to collect a simple debt, demanding from the debtor the debt recovery costs is taking unfair advantage since it cannot be said at that stage that such a cost is legally recoverable; particularly since those costs have not been substantiated at all. This is therefore taking unfair advantage against an unrepresented addressee.

Your letter also makes a number of other false and misleading claims:

(1)"In the event County Court proceedings are issued you may be liable for Court fees, further solicitors' costs and statutory interest . Should we successfully obtain a County Court Judgment ("CCJ") this may have a detrimental effect on your future creditworthiness and employability."

(2) "We wish to bring your attention to the case of ParkingEye Limited v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 in which the Supreme Court held that parking charges serve a legitimate commercial interest and are neither extravagant nor unconscionable. This case eliminates the main defence that you will have should the matter got to Court and will be relied upon, by our client, in any County Court proceedings"

Regarding statement (1) This is simply not true. You will be well aware that I will only be liable for these charges if your client wins the claim. You will also be well aware that provided a judgment is settled within the allowed timescales, the CCJ will not appear on any record. This is therefore a deliberate attempt to mislead me.

Regarding statement (2)
(a) Social media reports show that since the Supreme Court judgment the majority of properly contested hearings are won by motorists. This may be because parking companies have been encouraged to file specious claims.
(b) BW Legal have no idea what my ‘main defence’ is in this case
(c) The Beavis case was concerned only with the level of parking charges, and ruled that a charge of £85 was not a penalty even though the parking company had suffered no loss. The level of parking charges was never a major reason why parking claims were dismissed in the courts and is essentially a red herring. POPLAs statistics show that the main reason appeals are upheld are signage and ticket issues.
In any case, the Beavis case is not a silver bullet and BW Legal have not shown that in the particular circumstances of this case, Beavis is more favorable to themselves than the motorist. Beavis sets certain signage obligations on the operator and as these were not met, the charge reverts to a penalty. BW Legal have not shown these obligations were met.
(d) Recently a number of parking claims have been heard in court where BW Legal were assisting the claimant. BW Legal have proved themselves to be spectacularly incompetent and to have little or no understanding of the legal issues surrounding parking claims. I refer you to the following reports:
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/excel-lose-double-dip-case-at-peel.html
Excel lose double dip case at Peel Centre. BW Legal rival Gladstones for incompetence
parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk
Excel v Moyle 02/12/16 Guest report Just thought I'd let you know how I beat BW Legal yesterday. I was in the court waiting area when...

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/vcs-lose-in-court-keeper-not-liable-for.html
VCS lose in court. Keeper not liable for driver's actions
parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk
C8DP70P3 VCS v Mr A. 23/11/2016 Birmingham Court This was yet another case concerning the unreliable ticket machines used by Vehicle Contr...

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/bw-legal-incompetence-in-pursuing.html
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/mr-pickups-fun-day-out.html
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/football-story-nothing-to-do-with-wayne.html
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/excel-anpr-flawed-car-was-having-mot-at.html
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/excel-parking-youve-been-gladstoned.html
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/excel-advocate-reduced-to-tears-as.html
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/bw-legal-how-to-winlose-claim.html
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/excel-parking-get-gladstonedby-bw-legal.html

There is therefore no basis for this statement and BW Legal have provided no evidence that this is true. This is a bullying attempt to discourage motorists from defending claims.

Statements (1) and (2) both clearly take unfair advantage of the recipients lack of legal knowledge where they have not instructed a lawyer, by stating untruths and making unsubstantiated and unreasonable claims, and are all bullying attempts to discourage motorists from defending claims..

These are all violations of the CSA code of practice
1.y. communicate with customers fairly and transparently, and not intentionally mislead them
1.aa. treat customers fairly and not subject customers (or their authorised representatives) to aggressive practices, or conduct which is deceitful, oppressive, unfair or improper, whether lawful or not
10.c not mislead customers as to the consequences or inevitability of consequences arising from any legal or bankruptcy action

Those assertions and statements are also clearly contrary to the SRA’s Code of Conduct 2011, Chapter 11: Relations with third parties, and particularly are covered under Indicative Behaviours IB(11.7) and IB(11.8).

Next Actions

As per the CSA code of practice I require you to cease collection activities while this complaint is investigated.

If your explanation is not sufficient I will escalate to the CSA/SRA/FCA as appropriate.

As per the CSA code of practice I require all communications to be by letter post and not by phone or email.

The Debt Is Denied

The debt is denied. In order for me to fully provide details why the debt is denied I require the following information, which I view as reasonable under the CSA code of practice, and also the information requirements for pre-action protocol.

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

1.o. comply with all reasonable requests for information made by customers or their representatives, regulators, clients and creditors, whether statutory or not, and upon payment of the statutory fee if applicable

a) A copy of the parking charge notice(s)
b) A copy of the signage, if your client is claiming this creates a contract
c) A copy of the signage map, if your client is claiming a contract is created by performance
d) Whether your client considers they are acting as agent or principal
e) The name of the land owner, if not your client
f) Whether your client considers the charge is for trespass, breach of contract or a contractual charge
g) Whether your client is claiming keeper liability exists

Following receipt of this information I will provide my reasons for disputing the debt within 14 days. As per the CSA code of conduct I require you to cease collection activities until the dispute is resolved.

3.j. cease recovery activity whilst investigating a valid dispute

Alternative Debt Resolution

I am open to using alternative debt resolution. I suggest the Consumer Ombudsman as an appropriate body. The IAS has been well-documented to be a kangaroo court and would not be appropriate.

In your letter you also state I didn't raise an appeal with is incorrect I sent an email on XX/XX/2015 appealing the ticket, this was due to the machine being faulty and said 'OUT OF SERVICE'. This was the only machine in the car park. I also didnt have any bank cards on me to pay over the phone. I have offered to pay the parking fee to Excel of £3.50 and I also offered a goodwill amount of £5 so in total £8.50. This cheque was declined and returned to myself by Excel.

Your sincerely



Since 2016 i have not heard anything from BW Legal then all of a sudden a debt letter came, and now the Letter of Claims with a lot of paperwork asking me to fill in and send back to them.

My question really is where do i go from here, i have already appealed once with this letter which was emailed to them in December 2016 to which they did not respond. Do i send this again? or await the next letter from the courts.

Thank you for responses in advanced.

Quentin

Now it's court time then no more appeals!


Don't return their forms!


#2 in the Newbies FAQ thread takes you right through a court claim from receipt of the LBCCA right through to the hearing


Spend some time getting to grips with that post


First job is a rebuttal of the LBCCA - all covered in the FAQ

The_Deep

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, and another company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each year). They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

Hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned.

The problem has become so rampant that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Watch the video of the Second Reading in the House of Commons recently

http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41 recently.

and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind they will be out of business by Christmas.