Trolling/Taking down Moorside

doubledotcom

Here’s a draft email you can send to Moorside Legal and APN Group’s DPO. It highlights obstructiveness, cites transparency breaches, and sets out escalation to the ICO and CMA under the DMCC with specific statutory references and consequences.

Subject: Formal Notice – Breach of Transparency Obligations and Escalation to ICO and CMA

To: help@moorsidelegal.co.uk; litigation@moorsidelegal.co.uk; enquiries@apn.co.uk Cc: [your own address]

Dear Data Protection Officer,

This notice is directed to you in your statutory capacity under the UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018.

Independent verification confirms that Moorside Legal’s domain (moorsidelegal.co.uk) is configured as a catch‑all system hosted by Barracuda Networks. Mail sent to any address at your domain, including help@moorsidelegal.co.uk (published on your website) and litigation@moorsidelegal.co.uk, is automatically accepted by your server. Despite this, your firm routinely refuses to confirm receipt and attempts to frustrate communication by forcing portal use.

Such conduct constitutes:

- Procedural obstruction of legitimate correspondence.
- Failure of transparency in published contact channels.
- Potential breach of data protection obligations, as correspondence sent to published addresses is personal data requiring lawful handling.

You are hereby put on notice that:

- The burden of delivery is satisfied once mail is sent to your domain and accepted by your server (250 OK).
- Any denial of receipt will be treated as bad faith conduct and cited in complaints to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO).
- Your failure to publish a dedicated DPO contact address is itself a breach of transparency obligations under Articles 37–39 UK GDPR.

In addition, your obstructive practices will be escalated to the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2023 (DMCC), specifically:
Part 2, Chapter 1 (Unfair Commercial Practices) – for misleading omissions and obstruction of communication channels.

- Section 229 (Duty not to frustrate consumer rights) – for deliberate refusal to monitor published contact addresses.
- Schedule 18 (Blacklisted Practices) – for practices that materially distort consumer decision‑making by denying access to redress.

If the CMA finds against you, consequences include:

- Enforcement orders requiring you to change your practices.
- Financial penalties of up to 10% of global turnover.
- Director disqualification proceedings for systemic bad faith conduct.

Parallel complaints will be submitted to the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), citing breach of transparency obligations and frustration of access to redress.

You retain full responsibility for your mail server configuration and for ensuring that published contact channels are monitored. Continued refusal to engage will be treated as evidence of systemic bad faith and cited in all regulatory submissions.

Yours faithfully,

[Your Name]

Any thing sent to any address @moorsidelegal.co.uk is received, irrespective of whether the addressee is correct or not. Basically, they have a "catch all" system in place and therefore as long as their SMTP mail server accepts the incoming email with a "250 OK" response, it is deemed delivered, just like a postal signed for receipt. What happens after it has been received/signed-for is irrelevant. In legal terms, the email has been "served".

slapPCM

OK so what is the suggestion here after my last email?

(For some reason, I didn't receive any notification about the new replies here on thread which wasn't started by me...)

So I registered onto their portal, and did not find any way to reach them without calling...

Should I "Raise a dispute" saying "I do no woe this debt"? (I will have to leave the "best" number for them to contact me...)

Or I just sit tight and wait for their further letter(s)?

In terms of the actual parking company's charge, once I logged into the portal, I can see it. 

slapPCM

hey, sorry, that's totally my bad missing your post at 6 December at 5:33PM

being packing before travelling, my head's spinning hard.

I will do what you suggested! thank you!

slapPCM

btw, I just checked their website, and they actually took off any email address.... including "<a rel="nofollow">help@moorsidelegal.co.uk"</a>

.........

and the other two email addresses were not reachable, i.e. "delivery status notification (Failure)"

LoneStarState

slapPCM said:

btw, I just checked their website, and they actually took off any email address.... including "<a rel="nofollow">help@moorsidelegal.co.uk"</a>

.........

and the other two email addresses were not reachable, i.e. "delivery status notification (Failure)"

the help@moorsidelegal.co.uk email is still given in their privacy policy on their webpage which I just checked.

doubledotcom

Anything sent to help@moorsidelegal.co.uk is deemed served. Their domain is configured as a catch‑all, and the SMTP server returns a "250 OK" acceptance response.

That means delivery is complete the moment the message is accepted by their server. As this is the published Data Protection Officer contact address in their privacy statement, service to this address is valid and binding. Any later denial of receipt should be treated as bad faith obstruction.

Here is an explanation of each element in that report:

Email: help@moorsidelegal.co.uk
This is the address being tested. It is the one Moorside Legal publishes in their privacy statement as the contact for their Data Protection Officer.

Status: do_not_mail
This means the address is flagged as unreliable for communication. You can send to it, but it may not be checked or answered.

Sub-Status: role_based_catch_all
“Role-based” means it is a generic departmental address like help@ or info@ rather than a named person. “Catch-all” means their server accepts mail to any address at the domain, even if no real mailbox exists. Delivery is accepted, but whether anyone reads it is another matter.

Free Email: No
Confirms this is a business domain, not a free service like Gmail or Yahoo.

Did You Mean: Unknown
No spelling correction suggested. The address is valid.

Account: help
The part before the @ symbol. Here it is the generic “help” account.

Domain: moorsidelegal.co.uk
The organisation’s domain name. All mailboxes at this domain are controlled by the same server setup.

Domain Age Days: 865
The domain has been registered for about 2 years and 4 months. It is established, not brand new.

SMTP Provider: barracuda
Their email is hosted on Barracuda’s system. Barracuda often runs catch‑all setups that accept everything but do not confirm if a real mailbox exists.

MX Found: true
Confirms the domain is properly set up to receive email.

MX Record: d238565.a.ess.uk.barracuda.com
This is the actual mail server that takes in their email. It is the machine that gave the “250 OK” acceptance.

First Name / Last Name: Unknown
No individual is tied to this mailbox. Reinforces that it is a generic role‑based address.

Plain summary: Moorside Legal publishes help@moorsidelegal.co.uk as their DPO contact. Their server is set to accept all mail and gave a “250 OK” response. That means anything sent to this address is legally deemed delivered. Whether they monitor it or not is irrelevant: service is complete once accepted.

RedundantSound

doubledotcom said:

Anything sent to help@moorsidelegal.co.uk is deemed served. Their domain is configured as a catch‑all, and the SMTP server returns a "250 OK" acceptance response.

That means delivery is complete the moment the message is accepted by their server. As this is the published Data Protection Officer contact address in their privacy statement, service to this address is valid and binding. Any later denial of receipt should be treated as bad faith obstruction.

....

Thank you for what you are doing!

I am responding to a letter identical to your original post.

Is there anything I can do to support your complaint against them? Is it a simple process for me to raise a similar complaint?

RedundantSound

Just for info, I sent your email at the top of this page and got an error for the APN address which the appear to have changed;

Delivery has failed to these recipients or groups:

enquiries@apn.co.uk
A problem occurred while delivering your message to this email address. Try sending your message again.
Their website lists their email address as 

Media enquiries media@apn.co.uk 0330 808 48870

General enquiries info@apn.co.uk 

Their privacy policy shows their DPO; How to contact us
If you have any concerns about our use of your personal information, wish to exercise any of your
rights listed above or have any questions or complaints in relation to the content of this Privacy Notice
please get in contact by:
Emailing our appointed Data Protection Officer at dpo@apn.co.uk (subject heading: Data Subject
Rights - Your Name)

prowla

ChirpyChicken said:

It isnt a scam portal 

(Apart from the whole operation being a scam.)