CST letters' forum group thread

Radgieweegie

Okay, my first draft reads as follows: 

Hello, 

I am reporting CST Law (Credit Style Limited company no. 6133356) SRA number 639830 as I believe their actions violate your principles, namely 1 through 5. I will provide photographs of the communications I refer to throughout this report.

For background, in the most recent instance, I have been contacted regarding two alleged parking contraventions supposedly taking place on the 8th and 13th January 2020, by Smart Parking LTD. CST law acting on their behalf today contacted me with a letter headed “LETTER BEFORE CLAIM” demanding an amount of £170 for each of the two alleged contraventions, totalling £340. On the original correspondence I received from Smart Parking LTD in 2020, the amount was £100. CST Law has conjured an additional £70 per claim from thin air. This violates your principles 2, 3, 4, and 5. They are using their position as legal professionals to intimidate me into paying a debt that I do not owe, and adding their own inflated (illegal) amount to increase their margin. 

In addition to this, I live in Scotland, and in the letter received they cite various paragraphs of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims under the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (PAP), which does not apply in Scotland. They are misrepresenting the law to me in a manner that is vexatious, unreasonable, and downright dishonest. I believe this violates principles 1, 2, 4, and 5.

Approaching me in this way using their office to strong-arm me into paying a fictitious debt is entirely unacceptable and this is the reason I feel this report is necessary.

KeithP

When you come to actually write it I hope your salutation will be Dear Sirs rather than Hello.

This is a formal business letter.

Umkomaas

I wouldn't go into any of the monetary aspects. The SRA will tell you that they are acting on their client's instructions in that context. 

As I said before, it's about the misrepresentation of the law. They simply can't be threatening a Scotland resident with the law applicable only in England and Wales. And as lawyers they should know this, so either they are incompetent or implicated in attempted and orchestrated deceit, with the aim of extortion of a naive member of the public.

Don't give the SRA the opportunity to give you loads of verbiage on the monetary points,  blinding you with science, glossing over the CPR point, and essentially fobbing you off. 

Be very surgical with this. Less can be more.

KeithP

Umkomaas said:

...either they are incompetent or implicated in attempted and orchestrated deceit, with the aim of extortion of a naïve member of the public.

It would be good if you could work those words by @Umkomaas into your letter. 

Radgieweegie

Much appreciated folks.

northseajoe1

Another day, another LBC from CST - same circumstances as Radgieweegie's above. Smart Parking in Scotland.   I was intending to ignore completely, but I have a quick question:  is there any value in me sending a complaint to the SRA?    Would it reinforce other complaints, or just be a redundant duplication?  (The meat of my complaint would be identical to Radgieweegie's)

Umkomaas

is there any value in me sending a complaint to the SRA?    Would it reinforce other complaints, or just be a redundant duplication?  

Absolute value in complaining and would indeed reinforce other complaints. A single complaint alone would hardly raise an eyebrow, but a plethora would be more likely to shift them. And given that the CST strategy is to target Scotland, then it is a deliberate attempt to deceive - or, they are just totally incompetent. I can't think of any other reason!

beamerguy

The way CST carry on, maybe incompetence is the best word.

But your complaint to the SRA must be for MISLEADING THE MOTORIST ... then let's see if they say they were instructed by the client to mislead ????

D_P_Dance

The solicitor's primary responsibility is to the court, their client instructions come second.   They cannot get off by saying that they were doing as their client asked, Nuremburg put paid to that.

northseajoe1

Thoughts and (polite) comments, please: 

Dear Sirs

Complaint regarding CST Law (trading name of Credit Style Limited)

I am writing to complain regarding the business practices of CST Law. I would be grateful for an acknowledgement of my complaint and advice on what action you intend to take.

My two complaints are based on a series of letters I have received. Photocopies are attached. Attachment 1 relates to debt recovery, explicitly citing Scottish legal precedent; attachment 2 appears to be a formal Letter before Claim, referring to pre-court protocols under English law. Together, these letters show evidence of a firm incorporated in England and Wales supporting litigation regarding contracts and parties based in Scotland, and – apparently – employing the differentiation in legalities to seek financial gain.

My first complaint therefore relates simply to this firm's competence regarding legal jurisdiction. These letters are addressed to me in Scotland, referring to a contractual dispute in Scotland, suggesting that this firm is operating in a domain in which it is neither competent nor regulated.

My second complaint is more serious: the behaviour of this firm brings the reputation of the entire English legal profession into disrepute. My first complaint could be interpreted as simple incompetence; however a cursory Web search indicates that this is not an isolated instance. It is representative of a pattern, and it would be difficult for an objective observer to place a charitable interpretation on such a pattern; much more likely for them to infer – for example – an attempt to extort payment through threats or to elicit personal information through deceit.

In closing, I should emphasise that this is not just a legal issue, but an ethical one. These misleading letters are being sent by a regulated professional firm in England to people – often elderly naive people in Scotland – without access to any professional advice or knowledge of English law.

Yours faithfully

****