Breach of KADOE complaint to DVLA

Umkomaas

Looks good to me, especially heading them off on the debt recovery costs. Let us see how they respond!

Coupon-mad

Yep that's a good, snappy example of how to reply to a LBC.

jabfish

Thanks both.  Appreciated.

jabfish

jabfish said:

FYI - my intended email to the solicitor:

I have received your Letter Of Claim.  I am writing to BW Legal to inform you that:

 

1. I am seeking debt advice but I deny any debt and the case must be put 'on hold' for not less than 30 days under the PAP for debt claims 2017.
2. I require you to remove the extortionate £60 Debt Recovery Costs and return the case to your client to re-issue the PCN to allow the appeals process, as the Government best practice intends.
3. If you issue a claim, knowing that the add-on has been declared by the DLUHC Minister as 'designed to extort money from motorists', I will immediately report you to the SRA and will copy in my MP.
4. I have sent your client a SAR.

Below is response from BW Legal to my above letter; I don't intend to reply or take any further action at this stage.

We have outlined Our Clients response to the points you have raised.

 Point 1

 We have placed your file on hold for a period of 30 days starting from the (xx) April 2022 to allow you sufficient time to provide the information requested.

 Point 2 and 3

 Please be advised, the signage in situ makes reference to additional costs of debt recovery being incurred due to the non-payment of a PCN. It is our Client's position that a contract was formed when your vehicle entered and remained on the land in question, in excess of the grace period, and this included the terms and conditions regarding additional costs. Our Client is satisfied that under the parking contract, the additional costs incurred are recoverable and you are liable for the same.

 We have noted your position regarding if this matter is subject to court proceedings.

 Point 4

 We have noted your position.

Coupon-mad

Just wait, then when a claim is filed and (after you've defended it of course!) BW Legal send you the (immediately post-claim) intimidating letter that everyone on other threads is talking about being misleading, THEN report s complaint about BW Legal to the SRA.

jabfish

Noted and understood.  Thank you Coupon-mad.

Coupon-mad

Find, read and bookmark the other BW threads around now, while they are current.

jabfish

Coupon-mad said:

Find, read and bookmark the other BW threads around now, while they are current.

Have done - thank you for advice.  

Once again, reading posts from other people makes my blood boil that all these countless parking scams and rogue companies exist.  An absolute disgrace.

Coupon-mad

jabfish said:

Coupon-mad said:

Find, read and bookmark the other BW threads around now, while they are current.

Have done - thank you for advice.  

Once again, reading posts from other people makes my blood boil that all these countless parking scams and rogue companies exist.  An absolute disgrace.

Yup, join the club.

That's why people like myself and @bargepole have been doing this and much more to try to right the wrongs for maybe 15 years, and why we've publicised the issue on TV and were both involved in the new statutory Code of Practice.

Thank goodness the Govt and BSI thought outside the industry/motoring box and listened to the people this time, including all those good people who responded to the public Consultations as well.

patient_dream

Point 2 and 3

 Please be advised, the signage in situ makes reference to additional costs of debt recovery being incurred due to the non-payment of a PCN. It is our Client's position that a contract was formed when your vehicle entered and remained on the land in question, in excess of the grace period, and this included the terms and conditions regarding additional costs. Our Client is satisfied that under the parking contract, the additional costs incurred are recoverable and you are liable for the same.

This extortion fake on signs forms an unfair contract and is just a fairytale that the BPA introduced to scam the motorist ?

If the PPC thinks that the fake charge was incurred then they will be happy to prove that they they actually paid it ?  That would be a VAT invoice from the debt collector and proof of payment by the PPC ?  DON'T THINK THAT WILL HAPPEN ?

BWLegal should come clean with their clients and tell them that in the real world BWLegal are used to having this fake deducted and in the past they have been kicked out of courts.

Such a huge failure to be responsible to their clients and the courts. 

All this is against the SRA rules.  The SRA responded to a recent BWL complaint where BWL said they were working on their clients instructions.

But, BWLegal now know that their clients lie, they do not pay a debt collector ?

BWLegal have a responsiblity to the court to tell the truth. SO, did the PPC pay a debt collector and what proof can they offer to a judge. Could well be that HMRC will be interested. This is something the SRA and government should investigate

I strongly advise you complain to the SRA and in particular the methods BWLegal are using to extort money from the consumer

This out of control legal is a BPA member and is just another another reason the BPA is not fit for purpose

If this is how the BPA operates then it is a scammers paradise

The BPA claim they are driving standards upwards but i guess this is something BWLegal have yet to grasp

COMPLAIN ABOUT BWLEGAL TO THE SRA