Bwlegal & UK Parking Patrol LTD Altering Documents please help

Umkomaas

Bilbo_Baz said:

 'Pour encourager les autres'. 
I see yes I have worked that out in a different way .
This is about getting the word out that if people ignore Parking Invoices they will get a summons so they are prepared to lose some money because in the long run there profits are huge and far out way loses.

Nail on the head! 🔨 👏 Except it won't be a 'summons'.

Bilbo_Baz

you should have paid one of those appeals firms to deal with this for you rather then 15 pages on a forum...
Yes but then I might as well give them 150 quid and walk away but you know I am one of these people who will not give in and if they win they will get 1000s of revenge   tickets off me to chase and they will not get a penny for a single one as I know how to break the system.
I know some one who done some thing similar 1000s of every type of civil charge you can think of on one van not in his own name . Never paid a penny 3 years now and he is still at it !
And no this is not a rant just a fact  calm and collected !

Coupon-mad

No-one should pay an appeals firm.

One of them is so horrendous that Trustpilot has a banner headline warning about them on their page.

Bilbo_Baz

Silence is golden !

Snakes_Belly

Just to give an example of what happens in the cases of Excel and VCS. They are based in South Yorkshire so it is not viable for them to send a representative to courts around the country so they employ a firm like Elms Legal. Elms employ solicitors and barristers. I don't know on what basis that they are employed but a solicitor would have to be registered with the SRA. 

You are unlikely to know the person who will represent the Claimant until shortly before the hearing so there is no way to check whether the person representing the Claimant has the right of audience. 

I am not sure that the person in my hearing had completed the full training as a barrister. He had taken bar exams and been called to the bar but had not undertaken a pupillage. I only knew that when I looked at LinkedIn after the hearing.   
     

Bilbo_Baz

So back on subject
If BW Legal send out a replacement bundle  omitting the 60 quid add on .
Which contains the £80.00 Parking Charge notice and other very bad copies of replacement documents as previously stated.
So there is a time line by chance when a letter containing original  photographs was sent to WCC addressed to the Judge  The White One complaining about quality of photo's . There is an important time line here ( Maybe Pole of the Bayley want's to take some notice of this ?)
This is long before any discrepancy between the 60 and 80 was even an issue but the documents are the same bundle received from BW .
So if we believe that forensic science is as good as the Police and Crown make out then these  documents may contain at least finger prints  if not DNA that will match the sender and any other employee of BW who may have been in contact with them to add to staple wholes that will match up.
All these documents are filed in the court.   
So can we ask the court in light of complaint's already made that the person who signed  the original replacement bundle be summonsed to refute our allegations of " Abuse of Process " I call it Fraud and PTCOJ .
I the event they come to court and do not tell the truth the whole trust and nothing but the truth the I give you Lord Archer !!!
So may infract become a Police matter ?

Reading the posts on here these people are" well at it "  in common folk langwidge and  this needs to STOP NOW !! 
( Little Rant LOL)

Umkomaas

Has there been a murder I've missed somewhere along the line?

Snakes_Belly

The fake add on could be "False Accounting" in relation to the LBC which includes the £60.00 which was never paid to a debt collector.  

https://www.bestcriminaldefencebarrister.co.uk/criminal-defence-barrister-blog/2019/false-accounting-section-17-of-the-theft-act-1968/

Bilbo_Baz

Because a 'qualified self employed person' means he has 'disciplinary body to which he can be reported'.
Thanks Snakes  I think Keith has answered this to some extent  but I do wonder still if we might be missing some thing in this case . is it worth further investigation  subbing out cases ? I do not know the answer ?
I really want the solicitor in charge of the case from BW Legal to attend court on the e day  and state for the record that they did not send a bundle  that they signed  of documents contain a parking notice that's stares £80.00 discount  later changed to 60
That matches photographs complained about earlier  the point here is that they are cheating the rest of this is second place now I want to prove this .
They Say " Cheats Never Prosper"  Seems like they do in private parking scam's

Snakes_Belly

A solicitor should be on the list of solicitors whether employed or self employed and their professional body is the SRA.