Bwlegal & UK Parking Patrol LTD Altering Documents please help

Snakes_Belly

Section 17(2) of the Theft Act 1968 sets out two ways in which a document can be considered as ‘falsified’:

- either because it has an entry which is misleading, false or deceptive in a ‘material particular’ or
- by the omission of a ‘material particular’.

You could say that adding on £60.00 for debt collection when the agent that is employed for this purpose works on a no collection/no fee basis is misleading, deceptive and false.

Bilbo_Baz

Has there been a murder I've missed somewhere along the line?
Mate Lie in Court under oath you go to jail, in most cases  when one is caught out blatantly  lying. ( Apart From Donald Duck over in the White House )
Once they do it in court then we begin there , those who really think they are clever do end up behind bars or disbarred  if  they get off lightly  if caught out .
 Because they should know better when they put them self's up on the pedestal of Honor. 
( 'Pour encourager les autres'.  This can be a double edged sword  in the right hands  this site needs to take the next step not just win but punish the lie's and the cheat's.)
 this can be proven with some effort the truth will out.

Bilbo_Baz

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.   
Thanks for that I see the add on is bill head UKPPO LTD not BW legal so may be why they omitted it in the replacement bundle.
And we only got it on the deadline day for submitting documents  so it is an escalation of the Parking Invoice ?
I will make sure my daughter looks at this now she has taken over the case.

I think I need to go through the defense I submitted paragraph by paragraph on here so I can understand why apart from spelling mistakes its such a " Dogs Dinner "  and learn from it I ask for your guidance and patience please people >
  

Timeouts

Snakes_Belly said:

Section 17(2) of the Theft Act 1968 sets out two ways in which a document can be considered as ‘falsified’:

- either because it has an entry which is misleading, false or deceptive in a ‘material particular’ or
- by the omission of a ‘material particular’.

You could say that adding on £60.00 for debt collection when the agent that is employed for this purpose works on a no collection/no fee basis is misleading, deceptive and false.

We all know that the fake £60 is just a fabrication to get more money and a blatant lie

Has the debt collector ever raised an invoice for the parking company and did the parking company ever pay especially on a no win no fee situation. In my view if no proof can be offered by either the parking company or debt collector of this "invisible" amount, they should be reported to HMRC WHO CAN GO BACK MANY YEARS to unravel the scam. 

The likes of BWLegal and Gladstones claim they are instructed by their client. They sign a statement of truth that the claim is valid but fail to prove it

In my dealings with these dodgy legals they cannot prove it, they avoid the question and prefer to spout total and utter rubbish and that is the code of practice allows the PPC to do this.  WHAT JUNK
It really is like dealing with uneducated children.  

I am currently in the ping pong scenario with BWLegal and if they don't wake up their ideas about the fakery, if they take me to court (their stupidity says they will), this fakery will be top of my list and it will be referred to HMRC for investigation.   

Bilbo_Baz

Hi Every one the case has gone to a paper hearing only with BW trying to introduce selected posts of mine on here the bundle is huge  now  They are also trying to influence the judge with my " Derogatory Comments on the legal profession "
Just to be clear any comments I have made are mine and mine alone and my wife has zero involvement in them and has never been on here at all, and relate to my own life experience with corrupts and bent people involved in the legal profession from Police , Solicitors  and other officials very high up  who represent the Crown. 
I have nothing against all those mentioned above who act with integrity and honesty especially those who do good with good  honest solicitors top of my list.
My wife is a person of good Character she is the most honest person I have ever met in 6 years I have never known her to tell any sort of untruth she also goes to church every Sunday. She actually cried when she saw the new bundle but I am glad she is not going to attend court as she is very frightened of it. 
I will now start my book I think I will call it " Scandalous Scanlon" I would expect every major news agency in the free world to pick up on it. even 25 years later.
Getting back on track BW are now using the attached document to counter the £60.00 add on defense.
Comments and how to counter please would be helpful.
My Daughter has now taken over the case and I will have no further part in it save for research on here. 

D_P_Dance

I would suggest that you consider a complaint to the SRA.

https://www.sra.org.uk/

Le_Kirk

Bilbo_Baz said:

Hi Every one the case has gone to a paper hearing only ...........

Oh dear!  How are you/your daughter going to counter anything the PPC/solicitor have put forward if the judge is relying on papers?

Bilbo_Baz

Daughter is revising whole defense shortening it and taking out all  my Drival and Chum.
She has to Submit by tomorrow afternoon to court and other side so all relevant material for £60.00 add on defense including the recent Appeal by BW would be helpful I think as I am sure we all want this to stop the add on 60 quid so a win is needed if still possible.

beamerguy

Hi Every one the case has gone to a paper hearing only with BW trying to introduce selected posts of mine on here the bundle is huge  now  They are also trying to influence the judge with my " Derogatory Comments on the legal profession "

YOU OBJECT to a paper hearing as you will LOSE your voice.   You need at least a phone or video hearing.

I rather think BWLegal have misunderstood about your various remarks ... you are not making reference about the legal profession, you refer only about the poor conduct of BWLegal to which the courts have seen many times with this bunch.   BWLegal are turning this into Childrens hour

You need to question BWL about their fake £60 .... they still have no answer so NO TO PAPERS or even mediation

Le_Kirk

Bilbo_Baz said:

Daughter is revising whole defense defence shortening it and taking out all my Drival and Chum.
She has to Submit by tomorrow afternoon to court and other side so all relevant material for £60.00 add on defense  

defence including the recent Appeal by BW would be helpful I think as I am sure we all want this to stop the add on 60 quid so a win is needed if still possible.

Let's get this straight; you've written and submitted a defence, received a DQ, filled it in and sent it back; you've been allocated to small claims court and submitted your witness statement and evidence and NOW a judge says he is going to do it "on papers".  It is not permitted to alter your defence - unless you pay a fee.  How is this happening?