Second Letter of Claim from BW Legal? Huh?!?

heroicsatsuma

Hi All, 
So...... 
Got a second letter of claim from BW Legal today 17/09/2020. The first I received 09/09/2019!!! To which, I sent a SAR via email, but was told they couldn't send the information digitally as I haven't supplied any ID. I told the to send the information to the address they have on file and confirmed it.

Didn't hear anything till today. Do I have to start this whole rigmarole again? I took photos of the car park which I thought it was (as they just stated Purley Way Retail Park), as there's about 10 retail parks on Purley Way, chances are the signs may have changed since its been over a year. 

I hate these a$$holes honestly. 

Any help on what to do/next steps is greatly appreciated.

Many Thanks

Coupon-mad

Yep, just read the NEWBIES thread post #2 because BW Legal will file a claim for any old scam PPC, and we win 99% of them.

AND - please now make a real difference - A TASK FOR SEPTEMBER.

The Government is (this month only) consulting about a new statutory code of practice (CoP) and framework to rein in the rogue parking firms.  Read and comment on the draft CoP proposal and the enforcement framework consultation, and get everyone you know to do the same.

You will need to register to comment on the CoP and enter an occupation even if you are retired or a homemaker, but otherwise it is easy to navigate, and comment upon each section/subsection individually. You can save comments to edit later and or submit comments once you are happy with them.

https://standardsdevelopment.bsigroup.com/projects/2020-00193#/section

You do not need to register to comment on the enforcement framework which can be found here. It has a link on page 5 to make comments.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/913272/Code_Enforcement_Framework_consultation.pdf

At the very least, we say the parking charge level should be £50/£25 or higher level £70/£35, as per Council PCNs in E&W.  

And we say the added fake 'debt recovery' costs are just double counting the cost of letters, and MUST GO because that is unfair and illegal.

Please be heard.  You can bet the hundreds of PPCs will be commenting.

No apologies for repeating this vital 'call for action' to consumers, on every thread this month!

beamerguy

heroicsatsuma said:

Hi All, 
So...... 
Got a second letter of claim from BW Legal today 17/09/2020. The first I received 09/09/2019!!! To which, I sent a SAR via email, but was told they couldn't send the information digitally as I haven't supplied any ID. I told the to send the information to the address they have on file and confirmed it.

Didn't hear anything till today. Do I have to start this whole rigmarole again? I took photos of the car park which I thought it was (as they just stated Purley Way Retail Park), as there's about 10 retail parks on Purley Way, chances are the signs may have changed since its been over a year. 

I hate these a$$holes honestly. 

Any help on what to do/next steps is greatly appreciated.

Many Thanks

BWLEGAL ???? What can we say, probably now the most boring company on here and so easy to beat.
So they failed to respond to a legal requirement being the SAR.  That's worth a complaint to the ICO

The Letter before claim is also a legal requirement which must prove their claim. That really does mean proof.
You will have received forms to complete .... YOU DON'T

BWLegal will have added a fake £60 wich is unlawful and against the courts own ruling of Double recovery which is abuse of process ...... read what happens to BWLegal and similar dodgy legals here
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6103933/abuse-of-process-thread-part-2/p1?new=1

You need to respond denying any debt and requesting proof of their claim. At the same time, ask them for their legal authority to add £60.   They have none. If they reply (doubtful), they will say they are allowed to because of the code of practice.  Of course this is rubbish but it's a letter to show a judge should it go to court

It's because of their rubbish that judges find against them

D_P_Dance

Judges are not fools, they are well aware of BWL's little games.

heroicsatsuma

Thanks for the help (and sorry to bore you with this nonsense - I know they are a bunch of trolls) -  just extra stress and headache having to read through forums about how to reply from a legal standpoint is time consuming.

Is it best to put it in writing or an email exchange is fine as before?

beamerguy

heroicsatsuma said:

Thanks for the help (and sorry to bore you with this nonsense - I know they are a bunch of trolls) -  just extra stress and headache having to read through forums about how to reply from a legal standpoint is time consuming.

Is it best to put it in writing or an email exchange is fine as before?

Don't misunderstand, it's BWLegal who is the bore, not you.
We all find BWLegal's rubbish most amusing

Email is easier and faster ...... they can read it today

Coupon-mad

Please prioritise the two consultations though!

heroicsatsuma

Thanks guys - I registered on BSI and left a comment - thanks for pointing that out hopefully the government shuts this down although probably low down on the list at the moment.

I've sent another SAR requesting all information again - lets see what happens this time.  How can they still be chasing for something that happened over a year ago?  18 minutes over stayed in a free car park with loads of spaces - retail shopping is dead!

Le_Kirk

heroicsatsuma said:

Thanks guys - I registered on BSI and left a comment - thanks for pointing that out hopefully the government shuts this down although probably low down on the list at the moment.

Did you leave a comment on ALL the different sections?

Timeouts

heroicsatsuma said:

  How can they still be chasing for something that happened over a year ago?  18 minutes over stayed in a free car park with loads of spaces - retail shopping is dead!

Because they are desperate for money. Covid is hurting them

Coupon-mad

You have to submit comments about each and every section that you want to comment on, and separately go to the MHCLG page and answer their questions too, if you want to do this properly.  Here is some more information and a link to a thread talking about it:

BSI PAS 232 – COMMENTING ON THE CODE OF PRACTICE AS DRAFTED:

1.    You will need to register then log in, to comment on the CoP and enter an occupation even if you are retired or a homemaker.  

 

2.    Register, log into the BSI page, and download & read the cover letter here:

https://standardsdevelopment.bsigroup.com/projects/2020-00193#/section

 

3.    Read the cover letter again and note the suggested extra questions... if you agree that, say, the 'loading/unloading and dropping off, asking for directions, and disabled people parking on double yellows as they can on street' activities listed should be exempt (not parking events, what do you think?) then please go to the Annexes at the end of the PAS Code and find the one about Exempt Vehicles and state what other activity you think should be added to the exempt list. 

 

4.    Download the PAS itself and start commenting on what you wish to say something about.  Quick links to each section appear on the left of your page. 

 

You don’t have to comment on everything, e.g. you might want to skip the definitions and focus on later sections, and certainly look at the Annex tables at the end that show things like consideration & grace periods and exemptions.

 

5.    Submit comments when you are happy with them. Don’t just ‘SAVE’ and forget!

 

THAT IS HALF THE JOB DONE!

THE MHCLG CONSULTATION IS EASIER AS IT IS JUST A LIST OF QUESTIONS. 

 

6.    You can do it first if preferred or pushed for time:

https://forms.office.com/Pages/ResponsePage.aspx?id=EGg0v32c3kOociSi7zmVqAVPfAOtwRxLhHRwQ610oElUMzhQSVo0WUQ4SERVSEZaUU9DTUhFQ1VMUy4u

If your answers exceed 4000 characters (approx. 500 words to a single question or 16000 words (approx. 2500 words) for all the questions below, you can email your answers to parking@communities.gov.uk as long as you state who you are.

THESE ARE THE QUESTIONS YOU WILL SEE, FOR RESPONSES TO THE FRAMEWORK:

Q1 Do you agree or disagree that members of APAs should be required to use a single appeals service appointed by the Secretary of State?

Strongly agree/Somewhat agree/Neither agree nor disagree/Somewhat disagree/Strongly disagree

 

Q1.1 Please explain your answer

(free text)

 

 

Q2 Please provide any other feedback on the determination of appeals, including the funding model and features that an appeal service should offer e.g. telephone or in-person hearings, the ability to submit evidence online

(free text)

 

Q3 Please provide any comments you have on the proposal to enforce the Code by combining the ATA’s existing audit procedures with additional safeguards.

(free text)

 

Q4 Please outline any alternative means by which the Code could be monitored and enforced. You may wish to cite evidence from other regulatory frameworks which are relevant.

(free text)

 

Q5 Please provide any feedback you have on the proposed governance arrangements for monitoring the new Code of Practice

(free text)

 

Q6 Which parking charge system is most appropriate for private parking?

 a) the Three-tiered system

 b) Mirroring the Local Authority system

(free text)

 

 Q6.1 Please explain your answer. You may, for example, wish to make reference to other deterrent frameworks (for example, for railway tickets or traffic violations)

(free text)

 

 

Q7 What level of discount is appropriate:

40% as is currently offered in private parking and suggested in the three-tiered system, or

50% as is offered in Local Authority parking?

a) 40%

b) 50%

 

Q7.1 Please explain your answer, including whether the discount should be set at a different level

(free text)

 

 

 Q8 How should the level of parking charges be set and how should the levels be revised in future?

(free text)

 

 

Q9 Do you agree or disagree in principle with the idea of the Appeals Charter?

Agree/Disagree

 

Q9.1 Please explain your answer

(free text)

 

 

Q10 Do you agree or not that the examples given in the Appeals Charter are fair and appropriate? Agree/Disagree

 

Q10.1 Please explain your answer.

You may wish, for example, to suggest additional cases to be covered in an Appeals Charter or query existing examples.

(free text)

 

Q11 Do you agree or disagree that the parking industry should contribute towards the cost of the regulation?

Agree/Disagree

 

Q11.1 Please explain your answer.

(free text)

 

YOU CAN INSTEAD GIVE MORE CONCISE ANSWERS ONLINE, USING THE MHCLG PAGE LINK.

Don’t forget that answering these questions is the easier bit…

Looking at the BSI PAS (the draft code of practice itself) involves logging in and submitting comments again, and again and again and takes more time!

There is a discussion about PAS submissions and what the pages look like, here:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6195417/am-i-doing-something-wrong/p1