Threatening letter after acknowledgement of service

Snakes_Belly

Could touting a payment plan which would undoubtably attract interest when this is just a speculative invoice be worth a claim under the FCA? 

It's really costly to have an FCA complaint against an organisation when they have reached a quota. I think it's at least £500.00. 

jon_1827

Half_way said:

Have you complained to the landowner?
They should also be on the receiving end of that letter you propose sending, as principal they are jointly and severally liable for the actions of their agents, the parking company

It's a good point. I have been thinking about trying to drag the landowner in to it. Their sole interest is with the collection of rent, I'd imagine getting involved in this with the potential of proceedings for a breach of lease against them with no upside could result in the applying pressure to shut it down asap. I see no reason for them taking the management company/agents side in it.

Coupon-mad

None of this falls under the FCA remit because parking 'debts' are entirely outside the FCA rules.

Snakes_Belly

Coupon-mad said:

None of this falls under the FCA remit because parking 'debts' are entirely outside the FCA rules.

When a complaint is made to the SRA is there a charge to BW as a result of investigating the complaint? Ombudsman complaints usually incur a charge to the business. Interesting to know as it gives some leverage. There are also tables for Ombudsman complaints.

RN61

Rather than reply and thank all the helpers individually, I’ll keep it simple and short and do it all here in one go.

@KeithP Service acknowledged 13/4/22, so Defence is indeed due by 1600 11/5/22. I have read the NEWBIES thread, am up to date with that and intend starting on defence when this letter business is sorted.

@Coupon-mad Noted and thank you for the compliment. I’ll’ revise letter draft accordingly. FCA mentioned due to advice at https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/debt-and-money/action-your-creditor-can-take/harassment-by-creditors/ which does not refer to it being non-applicable as to FCA when issue is around parking debt. Point about hearing fee accepted, I know fair bit about criminal law but little about proceedings in the civil courts apart from what I’m picking up here. Re “THEY (BW legal) will pursue additional costs” not the firm they purport to represent, maybe they’re effectively one and the same? I’ll quote the entire paragraph for clarity then pick it apart. I will indeed be reporting BW Legal to the SRA.

@1505grandad BW Legal used the word JUDGMENT in their letter, which is correct in the UK per OED. My use of JUDGEMENT in proposed reply (prompted by MS WORD UK English Spellcheck) appears equally valid but not the word used by BW legal, so I’ll amend in the rewrite. And I’ve learnt something thanks!

@jn_1827 the criminal offence and civil tort of harassment both require more than one act, and ideally a WARNING to the perp (sorry, US slang!) as to future conduct which I have included IN CAPITALS in my letter. But as mentioned, it may be difficult to get police interested (although making a crime report might conceivably trigger at least a harassment warning to BW Law by the police! Because that's how police harassment investigations often roll...).

A civil claim for harassment on your own is not straightforward and could be costly (don’t risk your house on a point that is minor in the scale of things). However, a *group claim* might be a way forward if any of the legal eagles on here are of the view success is possible, and then legions of other recipients come forward to join in……

@Half_way No, I have not complained to the landowner and PPS / BWL have failed t say who that is. I have complained at length to the retailer into whose carpark (or loading bay) I foolishly ventured, but despite spending best part of £100 in their shop I got nowhere, and they simply referred me to those pursuing me and the landowner, whom they did not identify either.

@Umkomaas Hat-tip, yep. Never make a threat you are not prepared to carry out (including to children!).

@Snakes_Belly I understand FCA charge firms complained of £750 win or lose, not £500🤣 but as mentioned above, it seems parking debt issues are not subject of FCA complaint system…. maybe they could become so in event enough such complaints are “accidentally” submitted to them with copy of complaint to SRA and cc to MP’s…………… I have been unable to find out if legal firms are charged in event a complaint is received against them.

NB1. BW Legal email address for complaints is complaints@bwlegal.co.uk.   Email for the firm is (Removed by Forum Team) @bwlegal.co.uk according to https://solicitors.lawsociety.org.uk/office/532848/bw-legal-services-ltd. (Removed by Forum Team) is (Removed by Forum Team), Director. It may be worth copying complaints to that address as well. (Removed by Forum Team) is listed as Compliance Officer for Legal Practice Associate and presumably has responsibility for complaints but has same email address as Mr (Removed by Forum Team) – as does everyone who is listed as working there. Perhaps C (Removed by Forum Team) is at (Removed by Forum Team)@bwlegal.co.uk ?

NB2. https://www.bwlegal.co.uk/complaints-procedure/  Their website sets out what you can expect. But interestingly, they make no mention of complaint to the SRA being an option for their victims. All that is said in that vein is, “CAN I REFER TO THE LEGAL OMBUDSMAN? No, the Legal Ombudsman does not have jurisdiction to consider your complaint.” That is correct, because the LO deals with complaints against a solicitor that YOU employ and LBW are employed by PPS, a firm acting AGAINST you.

The same webpage provides Word Document download links to “Complaints Procedure – Consumer Debt” and “Complaints Procedure – Non-consumer debt”, which would put most people off, especially if browsing via phone. Both documents similarly exclude mention of complaint to SRO. Thus, there seems to be nothing on their website to suggest creditors / respondents can complain to the SRA about them.

BW Legal do bang on about your option of complaining to the FCA though, naturally without mentioning that parking debts are not dealt with by the FCA - so presumably the FCA will bin such complaints. Perhaps deliberate with a view to reducing number of complaints made to the SRA…. 

Coupon-mad

BW Legal are not connected to the parking firm at all; not one and the same.

They are clearly threatening to add costs and fees (plural) not for their client but it's written as BW pursuing for themselves, a sum that they know full well the Govt has called 'extortion' and which the small claims legal fees cap clearly disallows.

The Small claim track is set up for ordinary consumer disputes and the intention is 'low cost justice' NOT to encourage roboclaims funded by adding fake 'fees' on top of an already-doubled parking charge that covers 'all the costs of the operation' (Supreme Court).

And the claim-funding add-on is not even retained by the Claimant so if's nothing to do with any contract on signage!  It's feeding a model of intimidation followed by litigation as 'first resort'.

This has been the way these roboclaim firms have cashed in and got around the legal fees cap (as identified by HHJ Jackson in Excel v Wilkinson).  She was right.  By contrast, in VCS v Percy, HHJ Saffman was led up a garden path, took it upon himself to (weirdly and irrelevantly) read the BPA code of practice and got it wrong.

When you multiply £60/£70 by millions, you can see how lucrative it is for the likes of BW to do a 29 pence bulk trace, then send out one threatogram (especially if demanding multiple tickets on one letter = unjustly enriched by hundreds).

RN61

Complaint emailed to director sbarton@bwlegal.co.uk (I am out of the office. If you are a customer, please refer your enquiry to the relevant team dealing with your matter) and complaints@bwlegal.co.uk

Letter addressed to The Complaint Handling Partner, BW Legal Services Limited attached as pdf along with pdf of offending BW Legal letter of 19th.

BW Legal ref xxxx

PPS ref xxxx

Claim xxxx

Dear Sir

Complaint against BW Legal Services Limited

I am subject of a parking claim by PPS, whom you stand for.

Your Claim Form seeks £50 for Legal Representatives Costs, which is the maximum allowed by the consumer-protecting cap on legal fees for small claims. However, you have hidden an added and unjustified 'debt recovery fee' of £60 in the £164.28 Amount Claimed as well, making £110 in legal fees.

You will be aware that in February 2022 the Government banned double-charging and has called such sharp practice ‘extorting money' (Neil O'Brien MP on 7.2.2022, in the DLUHC's Ministerial Foreword to the new statutory Parking Code of Practice).

In these circumstances, it seems reasonable to view your added £60 as a contrived and reprehensible way to try to avoid the Government cap on legal fees for small claims.

In addition, your letter dated 19th April 2022 states, “If you defend the claim, the court will then set a hearing date where a judge will then consider both parties' statements and either award a County Court Judgment ("CCJ") against you, or dismiss the claim. Such hearings will result in additional costs & fees being incurred which we would seek to recover from you if we are successful.”

Your assertion that in event I lose at Court the Judge will “award a County Court Judgment (CCJ) against (me)” initially led me to believe that continuing to defend my case risked my credit rating. However, I have since discovered that what you told me is untrue. The correct position is that if your client PPS were to win, I would have 30 days to pay - and there would be no CCJ if I paid within that time.

The letter goes on to state, “Such hearings will result in additional costs and fees (plural) being incurred which we would seek to recover from you…”. This mention of potentially unlimited costs on top of what is on the claim form already was concerning as well. However, I now understand that the same consumer-protecting cap on legal fees for small claims referred to earlier also applies here, thus all that you might be able to add in event I continue to defend my claim is a hearing fee - and what you told me is mendacious.

Further, by asserting that, “we (i.e., BW Legal itself) would seek to recover (“additional costs and fees”) from you” you make it clear that BW Legal is threatening to add further and unjustified costs and fees (plural) in your own right and for your own benefit, not for your client PPS.

You will be aware that the small claim track is set up for ordinary consumer disputes and the intention is 'low-cost justice' and NOT to encourage robo-claims funded by adding fake 'fees' on top of an already-doubled parking charge that covers 'all the costs of the operation' (Supreme Court). And you seem to admit that the claim-funding add-on is retained by BW Legal as opposed to PPS the Claimant, so it is nothing to do with any contract, trespass, or signage. You are feeding a model of intimidation followed by litigation as 'first resort'.

I am a respondent who wants to fight the claim that your client has brought against me. Your letter of 19th misled me and caused me unnecessary distress and anxiety, as has your previous communication with me. The timing of your letter, just five days after my acknowledgement of service makes it hard to avoid the conclusion that you sent it as a ploy as soon as I showed I would be fighting the claim, the intent being to cause me distress and anxiety and discourage me from continuing my defence.

I understand that identical letters have been received by others whom your firm is pursuing on behalf of PPS. Thus, your letter of 19th is clearly not a one-off mistake by a junior worker.

Your actions and communication with me to date appears to breach StaRs (SRA standards and regulations), thus I intend submitting a complaint to the SRA.

Your letter of the 19th may also amount to an offence under section 1 Malicious Communication Act 1980 as well, and an act of harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.

FURTHER ACTION MAY BE TAKEN IN EVENT YOU COMMUNICATE SIMILARLY WITH ME AGAIN OR COMMIT ANOTHER ACT OF UNLAWFUL HARASSMENT.

KINDLY ACKNOWLEDGE THIS HARASSMENT WARNING AND RECORD A COMPLAINT ABOUT A) IMPROPER CLAIM FOR £60 'DEBT RECOVERY FEE' IN ADDITION TO £50 ‘LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES COSTS’ & THE CONTENT OF YOUR LETTER DATED 19th, HIGHLIGHTED ABOVE.

Please also note that I intend to continue to defend my claim and bring all this to the attention of the Judge.

I look forward to your prompt reply, email preferred.

Yours faithfully,

///////////////////////////////////////

Plan now (well, tomorrow) is to work on the Defence, and complain to SRA etc once initial draft is on here. Or I may run out of time...

RN61

How to report a legal firm such as BW Legal

https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/problems/report-solicitor/ 

Their form https://www.sra.org.uk/globalassets/documents/consumers/report-solicitor-form.docx?version=4a5e99 

Email address for your report report@sra.org.uk

NB. BWL communications are usually anonymised, presumably to avoid retribution. However, I have just remembered that the name of the representative issuing the claim appears bottom left of the Claim Form and it seems reasonable to complain about that individual as well as the firm. SRA and Law Society confirm person named on my claim form is a solicitor, so answerable to the SRA.

RN61

SRA website states Head of legal practice at BW Legal Services Ltd T/A BW Legal is [Removed by Forum Team]. Previous names of this firm are BW Legal Services Limited & BW Legal.

patient_dream

My view on BWLEGAL is they are a unprofessional company and are akin to a kid who has been banned from play school

The new code of practice will ZAP BWLegal and they know it ?