BWLegal Particulars of Claim now come with 11 paras of Debt Recovery Cost Justificatition

Umkomaas

Here you go:

Le_Kirk

Timeouts said:

oh boy ....... seems like BWLegal have a new script writer ?   has this person been surfing the internet ? with reference to "Debt Recovery Costs act " ??? 

...... or maybe they have been copying things from the Internet, which as we all know (according to many PPCs) that makes defences invalid!

Timeouts

Le_Kirk said:

Timeouts said:

oh boy ....... seems like BWLegal have a new script writer ?   has this person been surfing the internet ? with reference to "Debt Recovery Costs act " ??? 

...... or maybe they have been copying things from the Internet, which as we all know (according to many PPCs) that makes defences invalid!

Not forgetting the robo claims boys who bluff and bluster with nonsense and in the end have to rely on a judge which is not favourable for them.
There is more intelligence on this forum than the lot of them put together

Maybe we should refer to them as a "Boris"

EwanHusarmee

EwanHusarmee said:

henrik777 said:

Get a hold of the "no win no fee" evidence and then use that to batter them.
"May incur costs" but they don't as it's no win no fee.
Job done.

In the material from my SAR, the PCo show the debt recovery cost as £50.00. I had assumed the difference was VAT, but am I now right to infer that the missing £10.00 is the win fee for  Zenith/Gladstones/.... etc

How's this in teh absence of the wayback machine working?

1.      The Debt Recovery Cost has been applied to the Defendants debt since at least 26/03/2019. In the information provided by the Claimant following a Subject Access Request (appendix 3), the cost is listed as a ‘Debt Recovery Charge’ of £50.00.

 2.      From this point the Defendant received a number of pro-forma letters demanding payment from a succession of debt recovery companies for £160.00.

 3.      It is the Defendant’s contention that the £10.00 variance is the ‘win fee’ that the debt recovery companies would receive if the debt had been settled.

4.      In the Claimant’s Particulars para 20. the Claimant argues that they ‘would necessarily incur further expenditure by having to instruct agents’. It is known that Debt Recovery Plus a sister company of many of the Debt Recovery companies that operate in this sphere, including Zenith Collections who were initially assigned this debt, has operated on a no win no fee basis.

Castle

Umkomaas said:

There's no VAT anywhere in this game. 

No quite-Debt Recovery Plus has to charge VAT @ 20% on the "win" fees it charges to the Parking Company.
 

Umkomaas

Castle said:

Umkomaas said:

There's no VAT anywhere in this game. 

No quite-Debt Recovery Plus has to charge VAT @ 20% on the "win" fees it charges to the Parking Company.

£50 + VAT (=£60) or £60 + VAT?  All potentially recoverable by PPCs if VAT-rated. 

EwanHusarmee

EwanHusarmee said:

henrik777 said:

Get a hold of the "no win no fee" evidence and then use that to batter them.
"May incur costs" but they don't as it's no win no fee.
Job done.

In the material from my SAR, the PCo show the debt recovery cost as £50.00. I had assumed the difference was VAT, but am I now right to infer that the missing £10.00 is the win fee for  Zenith/Gladstones/.... etc

Hows this given that the wayback machine is broke today?

1.      The Debt Recovery Cost has been applied to the Defendants debt since at least 26/03/2019. In the information provided by the Claimant following a Subject Access Request (appendix 3), the cost is listed as a ‘Debt Recovery Charge’ of £50.00.

 2.      From this point the Defendant received a number of pro-forma letters demanding payment from a succession of debt recovery companies for £160.00.

 3.      It is the Defendant’s contention that the £10.00 variance is the ‘win fee’ that the debt recovery companies would receive if the debt had been settled.

 4.      In the Claimant’s Particulars para 20. the Claimant argues that they ‘would necessarily incur further expenditure by having to instruct agents’. It is known that Debt Recovery Plus a sister company of many of the Debt Recovery companies that operate in this sphere, including Zenith Collections who were initially assigned this debt, has operated on a no win no fee basis.

1505grandad

I have no problem opening on my desktop  -  are you using a phone?

Anyway Umkomaas has posted - above - a copy.

Castle

Umkomaas said:

Castle said:

Umkomaas said:

There's no VAT anywhere in this game. 

No quite-Debt Recovery Plus has to charge VAT @ 20% on the "win" fees it charges to the Parking Company.

£50 + VAT (=£60) or £60 + VAT?  All potentially recoverable by PPCs if VAT-rated. 

Unless the PPC pays VAT on the PCN's which are paid, it can't reclaim the VAT. Therefore, it will simply add £60 to the PCN as the £10 VAT is an unrecoverable cost.

Castle

EwanHusarmee said:

EwanHusarmee said:

henrik777 said:

Get a hold of the "no win no fee" evidence and then use that to batter them.
"May incur costs" but they don't as it's no win no fee.
Job done.

In the material from my SAR, the PCo show the debt recovery cost as £50.00. I had assumed the difference was VAT, but am I now right to infer that the missing £10.00 is the win fee for  Zenith/Gladstones/.... etc

Hows this given that the wayback machine is broke today?

 4.      In the Claimant’s Particulars para 20. the Claimant argues that they ‘would necessarily incur further expenditure by having to instruct agents’. It is known that Debt Recovery Plus a sister company of many of the Debt Recovery companies that operate in this sphere, including Zenith Collections who were initially assigned this debt, has operated on a no win no fee basis.

Zenith Collections is simply a trading name of Debt Recovery Plus Ltd; it's the same company!