Letter Of Claim from BW Legal / Premier Park

Coupon-mad

The Judge will dismiss the fake add-on.  These discussions that say ''did they ad £60?'' (like it's new and different) are a waste of time.  Of course they did, and the defence covers that already.  There is nothing to see here.

Far more important that the OP understands the main points of their specific defence ot the parking charge and the main points are not the added £60 (in fact that is peripheral).  

I am being driven away, like @bargepole has been most of the time, by pointless threads about the added £60.  I detest it so much it puts me off reading a thread.  Please stop.

beamerguy

D_P_Dance said:

Yes, they should read the newbies thread, yes they should search ..... they don't

Beamer, you may well be able to tolerate stupidity more than I.  As a Consul, having to get people out of foreign jails, dealing with uninsured travellers in the USA, deal with relatives when druggies have overdosed in foreign parts, etc., my tolerance for such behaviour has eroded.

The simple reason I tolerate it Sir Dance is that I hate these scammers and I really do not mind helping people to understand.

For you, with all your experience, you might like to offer your service to Boris as right now, he is in great need of professionals in his cabinet

D_P_Dance

I am being driven away, like @bargepole has been most of the time, by pointless threads about the added £60.

Me too, but my beef is that people ask questions the answers to which can be found by spending a few minutes googling.

beamerguy

D_P_Dance said:

I am being driven away, like @bargepole has been most of the time, by pointless threads about the added £60.

Me too, but my beef is that people ask questions the answer4eento which can be found by spending a few minutes googling.

Don't wish to be rude old boy but what about your copy and paste you add to most threads ?

D_P_Dance

Many newbies, (for whom it is intended),  have said that they have found it helpful,  Many MPs are well aware of this scam.  

beamerguy

D_P_Dance said:

Many newbies, (for whom it is intended),  have said that they have found it helpful,  Many MPs are well aware of this scam.  

OK,  and it is newbies we want to help

thecoat

FWIW, I was aware of the of the double recovery issue having read the newbies thread first, my main reason for starting a new thread was that I was unsure what to do when a second Letter of Claim was received for the same purported 'debt'. I'm very grateful to anyone taking time to help, and whilst doing so you have also helped me be certain in my mind which items in the breakdown of their claim relate to the double recovery. Thank you.
Anyway, I have now written again to BWlegal again denying the debt and complaining about the double recovery (just as I did last year) , this time copying in the SRA as suggested. I have also brought GDPR into the picture since I instructed them last year to delete my phone number from their database and to only contact me by email or post, yet the automated calls have continued throughout the year, together with a couple of recent calls from real humans. (well the accuracy of the word 'human'  is debatable, but you get my drift !) We'll see what, if anything, happens next.
Thanks again for advice offered so far 

beamerguy

BWLegal are in denial as every case adds fake amounts and that increases their chances of being kicked out of court.  I have just seen one of their witness statements where they deny Double Recovery ?
The problem is they don't say why and are still relying on the code of practice which of course as we all know is complete rubbish.
As far as rhe SRA, it's a members club for legals and all BWL will say that they were instructed by their clients.
BWL has a duty to their client and the court.
Given that BWL has suffered a massive blow in their attempt to fake amounts owed, one must wonders if they advise their clients they face a case being dismissed.

Currently, we are seeing more and more courts dismissing their cases and that will continue. It does not follow that Abuse of process will be the words used by the judge but as long as Double Recovery is highlighted which of course is abusing the courts, let the judge select another reason to dismiss the case. That is what's happening now.

They are including the Salisbury case which really means nothing as the area judge stopped short regarding the fake add-ons and comments made about the Beavis case are being used as a feeble reason for these add-ons.

Regarding the phone calls, switch on your radio or TV, place your phone next to the speaker and let them listen to the news or whatever. Let them waste their time and money .... they do that a lot

thecoat

Great idea re: the phone calls !