We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
UKPC- No PCN and £170 invoice from ZZPS debt collectors- What to do???
Comments
-
Hit the solicitors with it now You might be able to head them off (even if it's just on the added costs). You will have set your stall out early and should they continue with the added costs element to the claim you can refer to your correspondence in any subsequent court papers. By ignoring your response, you could argue, indicates an unreasonableness on their part.JustAUser said:
Thank you for your quick reply.Coupon-mad said:Not at this stage. SRA won't be interested. There is no breach of standards for demanding what their client wants to demand.However, do respond with the usual reply about the DLUHC's new Code banning fake debt recovery 'costs' and state that if a claim is issued with those enhanced/fake costs added, knowing they are banned and branded 'extortion' by the Govt, it will show a lack of good faith and honesty from them and their client.
You say respond, do you mean respond to the solicitors? Or is this something I would add to the defence (when they eventually take me to court as it seems like)?Please note, we are not a legal advice forum. I personally don't get involved in critiquing court case Defences/Witness Statements, so unable to help on that front. Please don't ask. .
I provide only my personal opinion, it is not a legal opinion, it is simply a personal one. I am not a lawyer.
Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.#Private Parking Firms - Killing the High Street5 -
You need to read other LBC threads, if you didn't realise what we are hitting solicitors with at pre-action letter stage. Yes, email them.PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
CLICK at the top or bottom of any page where it says:
Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD3 -
Thank you for this. I will see if I could draft up something.Umkomaas said:
Hit the solicitors with it now You might be able to head them off (even if it's just on the added costs). You will have set your stall out early and should they continue with the added costs element to the claim you can refer to your correspondence in any subsequent court papers. By ignoring your response, you could argue, indicates an unreasonableness on their part.JustAUser said:
Thank you for your quick reply.Coupon-mad said:Not at this stage. SRA won't be interested. There is no breach of standards for demanding what their client wants to demand.However, do respond with the usual reply about the DLUHC's new Code banning fake debt recovery 'costs' and state that if a claim is issued with those enhanced/fake costs added, knowing they are banned and branded 'extortion' by the Govt, it will show a lack of good faith and honesty from them and their client.
You say respond, do you mean respond to the solicitors? Or is this something I would add to the defence (when they eventually take me to court as it seems like)?0 -
That's the thing, it is not explicitly labelled as "Letter Before Claim" as I have seen on other solicitor letters. However, it does say that if I don't pay the full amount, they'll issue County Court Proceedings against me.Coupon-mad said:You need to read other LBC threads, if you didn't realise what we are hitting solicitors with at pre-action letter stage. Yes, email them.Which would make it a LBC I suppose.0 -
You might want to add a little bit to that, using the draft produced on @jabfish's thread.JustAUser said:
Thank you for this. I will see if I could draft up something.Umkomaas said:
Hit the solicitors with it now You might be able to head them off (even if it's just on the added costs). You will have set your stall out early and should they continue with the added costs element to the claim you can refer to your correspondence in any subsequent court papers. By ignoring your response, you could argue, indicates an unreasonableness on their part.JustAUser said:
Thank you for your quick reply.Coupon-mad said:Not at this stage. SRA won't be interested. There is no breach of standards for demanding what their client wants to demand.However, do respond with the usual reply about the DLUHC's new Code banning fake debt recovery 'costs' and state that if a claim is issued with those enhanced/fake costs added, knowing they are banned and branded 'extortion' by the Govt, it will show a lack of good faith and honesty from them and their client.
You say respond, do you mean respond to the solicitors? Or is this something I would add to the defence (when they eventually take me to court as it seems like)?
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6309928/breach-of-kadoe-complaint-to-dvla#latest
Please note, we are not a legal advice forum. I personally don't get involved in critiquing court case Defences/Witness Statements, so unable to help on that front. Please don't ask. .
I provide only my personal opinion, it is not a legal opinion, it is simply a personal one. I am not a lawyer.
Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.#Private Parking Firms - Killing the High Street3 -
Thank you for this much appreciated.Umkomaas said:
You might want to add a little bit to that, using the draft produced on @jabfish's thread.JustAUser said:
Thank you for this. I will see if I could draft up something.Umkomaas said:
Hit the solicitors with it now You might be able to head them off (even if it's just on the added costs). You will have set your stall out early and should they continue with the added costs element to the claim you can refer to your correspondence in any subsequent court papers. By ignoring your response, you could argue, indicates an unreasonableness on their part.JustAUser said:
Thank you for your quick reply.Coupon-mad said:Not at this stage. SRA won't be interested. There is no breach of standards for demanding what their client wants to demand.However, do respond with the usual reply about the DLUHC's new Code banning fake debt recovery 'costs' and state that if a claim is issued with those enhanced/fake costs added, knowing they are banned and branded 'extortion' by the Govt, it will show a lack of good faith and honesty from them and their client.
You say respond, do you mean respond to the solicitors? Or is this something I would add to the defence (when they eventually take me to court as it seems like)?
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6309928/breach-of-kadoe-complaint-to-dvla#latest
I am curious, the poster in that thread had a 30 day reply form and an Annex 1 Information Sheet with the Solicitors letter. I did not get these documents and I only have 14 days or I get a CCP.Is this normal?Will type up the email when I am back home0 -
If it is 14 days it is normally indicative of debt collector. What is a CCP?2
-
Who are the solicitors?1
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.6K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.5K Spending & Discounts
- 247.5K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.6K Life & Family
- 261.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards