Abuse of Process ... District Judge tells BWLegal

Blazkowicz

Apologies if this thread is closed. I have my own case with BW going to Southampton court in March. The thread is:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6027051/this-is-a-tough-one&page=5#topofpage
As my following question may pertain to those arguing this threa'ds advice I thought it best to post here.
All of the fun described in this thread happened after my defence was submitted so I am adding Coupon Mad's #14 as addendum to my Witness Statement as monkeynuts45 did for yesterday's win..
Coupon Mad - I can't seem to PM you, but I wanted to ask - you mention that it may be worth contacting BW to remind them of the £60 Abuse of Process cases in Southampton. Could this be done when I send them the Witness statement? Perhaps with a request to drop hands.

Fruitcake

Most of the regulars keep their PM boxes closed/full otherwise they would be swamped with requests for help every day.

C-m sometimes allows PMs in certain circumstances but she will contact you first if that is the case.

Personally I would send the reminder letter to the scamlicitors asap. It's up to you whether you want to make a drop hands offer or get £95 in your back pocket plus a chance of more for unreasonable behaviour if applicable
See what others say.

Redx

As long as it's done asap , I don't think it matters if it's done at WS time or before

As your WS is going in today , remind them in the email body itself , attaching the WS and exhibits as attachments

beamerguy

I agree with the above, especially as it's southampton.

Thus far, BWL have not come up with a valid/legal reason for the £60 that overrides the law and the Supreme Court plus CRA 2015

They know the reception they will get in Southampton so a drop hands offer that they immediately discontinue and pay you £95 which will be your claims cost if they proceed and lose

I think they know that they will be spanked again for Abuse of process

A complaint to the SRA about this poor BWL conduct is in order

Blazkowicz

Thanks all.
A point on #14 Abuse of Process from Coupon Mad:
Point 2. states:
"The standard wording for parking charge/debt recovery contracts is/was on the Debt Recovery Plus website - ''no recovery/no fee'', thus establishing an argument that the Claimant is breaching the indemnity principle"
Is this point to be employed in such case where there either was no DRP involvement, or (like my case relating to a 2015 ticket) - it is not remembered whether they were involved?

Redx

Expand it to include any debt collector or solicitors acting as debt collectors , such as b w legal

legal_magpie

The Southampton order has been circulated to many other courts

Blazkowicz

I have included B W in Para 2, stating that their pricing structure is on their website as "no-win no-fee".

beamerguy

Agree with Redx ...... whilst I don't think that matters too much, if it was DRP there is a screenshot of their page on this thread posted by Umkomaas. DRP removed the page but we have it. ?

The point being with this sham from BWLegal is that POFA2012, the law, says they cannot add on cloud dreaming amounts and it is POFA2012 that first spanked them in Southampton .

BWLegal often quote the Beavis case as if it is a magic wand for them. BUT, it is the magic wand for us as the Supreme court ruled ...
198. ''...The charge has to be and is set at a level which enables the managers to recover the costs of operating the scheme...''

To everybody that is a simple ruling which means that the ticket price includes the costs of recovery. Meaning that BWLegal don't have a clue and their reference to the Supreme court is utter rubbish

Then there is The Consumer Rights Act 2015. BWLegal seem to want to break every law going .... that is why they are failing and if they continue adding fake amounts, 2020 is going to be a very bad year for them

The question now is why the SRA retain them as members as BWL go against the principals of the SRA

Blazkowicz

One this to clarify:
Am I, and indeed any other OP defending in a similar case, able to provide photographs of the two General Form of Judgement Orders: E8GF1V7V, F2QX4W28 (provided in a dropbox by CouponMad) as exhibits in my Witness Statement?
Will my possession of a photograph of these documents that I did not take be struck out as unmissable?