CST letters' forum group thread

Coupon-mad

i am trying to submit an on-line 'contact us form to CST Law.

Why would you do that?  At what point do we tell anyone to write to debt collectors?

northseajoe1

@Coupon-mad is right to question the logic of engaging with CST, but on-line contact forms should really be handled with care in ALL commercial engagements.

Typically, you retain no evidence of when you responded, and maintain no record of what information you have provided. The other party gains all the benefits. 

Using an on-line form to contact an organisation like CST is <tact> highly inadvisable </tact>.  

northseajoe1

Update; e-mail from SRA: 

Dear Mr **** 

Thank you for your report of 8 February 2021.

Having carried out an initial review we have decided that your concerns need to be investigated further.  Information about our investigations can be found on our website at www.sra.org.uk/sra/decision-making/guidance/investigations-gathering-evidence

Please note that we will not be looking at all of the concerns that you have raised.  We will not deal with legal issues as these are matters for the court.  If you believe that the claim for unpaid parking fees is not legally recoverable you will need to challenge this directly with the firm or through any proceedings issued for recovery.

We can look at the firm’s involvement with the parking company in respect of its processes for seeking recovery of unpaid parking fees.  This could include whether any unfair advantage has been taken of individuals and whether the process of recovery against you has been clearly explained. 

We will pass the report to another Investigation Officer to look more closely at your concerns. At this stage, we cannot give you the name of the Investigation Officer who will be investigating the matter. However, upon receiving the matter, they will review it and aim to contact you within 30 days of this email.

Where we identify serious breaches of our rules, Standards or Regulations, or serious risks to consumers, the public or the wider public interest, we will take action. However, we close most of our investigations without taking any formal regulatory action. That can be because, following investigation, we find that there has not been any serious breach.  Or, where some breaches have occurred, the firm or individual has recognised this and taken steps to make sure they do not happen again.

Our Enforcement Strategy sets out how we consider seriousness and the factors we take into account. This can be found on our website at www.sra.org.uk/sra/strategy-2017-2020/sub-strategies/sra-enforcement-strategy.

We aim to be transparent about our investigations wherever possible. We may disclose the information you have provided to us to third parties including those involved in regulating the profession or law enforcement. If you have any concerns about this, please discuss them with the Investigation Officer when they contact you.

Yours sincerely

 

 ******   (Ms)

Investigation Officer

Investigation and Supervision

Solicitors Regulation Authority

Coupon-mad

Very good.  Nothing will come of it because the solicitors will say they are pursuing a legitimate debt and acting on their client's instructions.  But nice to have the SRA breathing down their necks.  CST Law need investigating, as they all do.

Umkomaas

I'm sure @northseajoe1 will confirm, I think it's the misleading reference to PoFA keeper liability in Scotland being made by CST. 

Coupon-mad

That will be well worth the SRA investigating. 

Going forward, I still hope that the Scottish Government will realise their error and never enact that section of the Transport Act.  Copying the POFA for future cases was stupid and unnecessary in Scotland, and smacks of BPA lobbying, to me.  I reckon the Scottish Ministers have walked into it with their eyes closed, having been told by the BPA what a good thing it will be if the law was the same as in E&W (where the POFA Schedule is a broken piece of legislation used and abused to extort money from the public, and ruin high streets).

We must hope that the Scottish Government will think again, given that keeper liability is not yet enacted.  If not, their courts will have to brace themselves for a tsunami of claims, like we saw here (a few hundred claims in 2012 became 110,000 approx, in the last full year pre-pandemic, and maybe even more during the pandemic year).  Good luck Scotland if you continue with that path.

northseajoe1

Umkomaas said:

I'm sure @northseajoe1 will confirm, I think it's the misleading reference to PoFA keeper liability in Scotland being made by CST. 

That's exactly right. My complaint related to (a) jurisdiction and competence and (b) deliberate attempt to mislead.  I'll let you know how I get on.

I think @Coupon-mad is correct that I'd have no luck with other aspects. CST did not add on admin charges to my threats, so if keeper liability were upheld, I'd arguably be contractually liable and CST are not responsible for their clients' pricing. 

Umkomaas

northseajoe1 said:

Umkomaas said:

I'm sure @northseajoe1 will confirm, I think it's the misleading reference to PoFA keeper liability in Scotland being made by CST. 

That's exactly right. My complaint related to (a) jurisdiction and competence and (b) deliberate attempt to mislead.  I'll let you know how I get on.

I hope the SRA don't conclude that this was an unfortunate administration error .... but I've been around here a long time!

D_P_Dance

Worth a read

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/sdt-and-sra-interventions/decisions-and-interventions/5108174.article

LittleJay14

Hi everyone, 
Im fairly new to this and am fairly bad at navigating around on this site, so wasnt sure if i was to seek advice here. Or if someone could point me in the right direction. 

I received a parking fine from a private car park UKCPS just over 2 year ago. Ignored the fine as i read a few things on it and people said its best to leave them and they go away. Well little did i know that was not true. About a year later I get a notice to pay £100 more than the fine originally instructed. That also went quiet for about a year, until a few month ago when CST Law sent me a letter stating that I had £160 to pay for the parking fine. I have now just received a "Letter Before Claim" for £160 stating that if I do not respond or pay this will be taken to court giving me 30 days to respond. I am a bit unsure what to do as it does seem like a fairly legitimate letter and I am slightly worried it goes on my credit history. If anyone knows what I can do or has any advice, it would be greatly appreciated.

Many thanks.