[ En Te See] NTK ignored :( [Bee UU Legal] follow up advice please

RippedOffBritain

Le_Kirk wrote: »

If it's not too late, try this link - found by searching hidden keypad odeon.

It is now thanks Le-Kirk... However I had already found that one, and it's the one I referred to above as CM's re-write of the defence... unfortunately the majority of it didn't fit my case as I don't have the back-up that that defendant had which is considerable... plus I don't have the actual legitimacy of parking anyway, or the 'change of use angle and burden of proof/duty to inform a previous user of the carpark as in that case. I'm sure if'I'd been more on the ball I could have adopted a point or two, but the majority of that case had far more supporting evidence .

Once again However, thanks for your efforts and the direct Link, as all the previous advice, greatly appreciated.:T

Le_Kirk

You are welcome - let's hope it all works out for you.

RippedOffBritain

Whilst I am [NOW] well aware that these robo-claim specialists are well versed in threats, I am actually surprised by the use of language and rhetoric they are allowed to use in this pursuit?
The initial usage of ‘official-looking forms’ , to confuse the defendant into believing they are being dealt with by the authorities, including ‘overly helpful’ “what should I do Now” headings etc. that follow the same framing and styling that government forms now do as part of the plain speaking easy to understand method of form writing campaign , clearly all designed to suck the defendant in to paying because they “WILL” (sic) have to pay or get a CCJ etc.(because this is an official Court letter". but…
This most recent letter “IMPORTANT…NOTICE OF IMPENDING COUNTY COURT JUDGMENT”
Link Attached https://nfil.es/w/0G4OIh , though I’m sure you’ve all seen them before, This letter seems to me to have over stepped the “suggestion–to-mislead” line and into blatant lying??
The Heading is fine , stating ‘A County court Judgment may be entered against you’, but after laying out the situation so far as they see it, they then state;-
“If you do not contact us or respond to the County Court Claim, We will enter a County Court Judgment (CCJ) against you. after the xxth of xxxxxxx2019. If a CCJ is entered against you, it will remain on the Judgment Register for six years and you may have difficulty in obtaining further credit.
If a CCJ is granted and you still do not make arrangements to pay, we may seek to enforce the CCJ through one of the following:-
Warrant of Control………………………………………….a County Court Bailiff may visit your home.
Attachment of Earnings…………………………………..Your employer may be ordered to make deductions etc.
Order to attend court for Questioning……………..You being ordered to disclose financial circumstances

What I’m aware only the Court can actually grant a CCJ and that will only be after I have been told to pay by the Court and failed… is what they have written above actually factually correct and ‘legal’(sic) In that they are making statements as a’ Solicitors’,
Surely they can only enter a County Court Claim against me?
It won’t become a ‘Judgment’ until a Court grants it?? Or is their terminology still correct? It just seems to the layperson that they are overstepping the scare-tactics line by blatantly lying, as they follow up this apparent ‘lie’ with the factual statement regarding “If a CCJ is entered against you, it will remain on the Judgment Register for six years and you may have difficulty in obtaining further credit”.

What I’m getting at is they use ‘entered’ for what they will do and then use ‘entered' again in the statement regarding what will happen ‘if’ a CCJ is granted by the court.

I’m not clutching at straws here, I am well aware I will be going to court here, It does just genuinely feel like they have overstepped the misdirection line and moved into outright lying!
Or is their wording still factually correct and I’m just uninitiated?

I’d written all this a couple of weeks ago but computer crashed losing it all, but looking at it all again this weekend inspired me to ask the question here.. to see if this threatening style has any place in the defence under ‘threatening behaviour and outright lying’ ??

Typically whilst writing this their Intention to continue and their DQ has just arrived (robo-claim first of the month anyone?):mad:

Coupon-mad

You are not clutching at straws.

BTW it is 'judgment' (no first 'e' in the legal spelling!). Just want you to get it right in your complaint.

That letter has been seen before over the past few weeks.

Every time someone has mentioned it, we've told them to complain to the SRA. People who have acknowledged the claim and say they intend to defend, should NOT receive that pack of misleading sh1te whilst they are drawing up their defence in good time.

Search the forum for BW Legal impending SRA and you will find the other threads.

RippedOffBritain

Coupon-mad wrote: »

You are not clutching at straws.

BTW it is 'judgment' (no first 'e' in the legal spelling!). Just want you to get it right in your complaint.

That letter has been seen before over the past few weeks.

Every time someone has mentioned it, we've told them to complain to the SRA. People who have acknowledged the claim and say they intend to defend, should NOT receive that pack of misleading sh1te whilst they are drawing up their defence in good time.

Search the forum for BW Legal impending SRA and you will find the other threads.

Thanks will do,

and as for the Red text above That was the other thing I had originally typed but lost and then forgot about... the fact that they are effectively suggesting that they are following this course of action because I have not responded correctly, when its quite clear on MCOL that my defence has been submitted, so yet again another Blatant Lie

RippedOffBritain

Sorry can someone confirm whether it is acceptable and or advisable to return the DQ N180 to the Court via ccbcaq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk or by Post?

If so then is the format,

address: ccbcaq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk
Subject : Claim No.
Text : Please find attached a PDF copy of my Directions Questioner form N180


?? or is it better to send it via post?? I have it ready for [post if this is preferable) ??


Thanks, ROB

KeithP

Return your completed DQ to the CCBC using the same email address and in the same manner that you sent your Defence.

Refresh you memory by re-reading post #26 above.

Remember to send a copy to the Claimant - address on your Claim Form.

RippedOffBritain

Thanks Keith, I found the address I had posted on bargepoles Thread so that had confused me, but thanks again, phenomenal timing

rachity

Do you not have to send a copy of the DQ to the other party as well?

RippedOffBritain

KeithP wrote: »

Return your completed DQ to the CCBC using the same email address and in the same manner that you sent your Defence.

Refresh you memory by re-reading post #26 above.

Remember to send a copy to the Claimant - address on your Claim Form.

DONE AND DELIVERY REPORT RECIEVED,THANKS

rachity wrote: »

Do you not have to send a copy of the DQ to the other party as well?

Yep, as Keith mentioned above too I had already gotten a copy ready to post to them so will send that off with proof of postage this morning :beer: