Moorside legal, what next?

Coupon-mad

"Our Client’s legitimate interests for charging and additional fee is to encourage payment when the Parking Charge becomes due and to avoid the need for debt recovery".

Yet when is it added to enrich both companies (it's splt 50/50 if duped people pay)?

Why, at debt recovery stage!

The above explanation for double recovery of minor 'letter-chain' heads of cost that must be already covered by the full PCN sum* is balderdash.

*so said the Supreme Court in 2015.

adam1415

I didn't notice but moorside rang me and left automated voicemail to call them and resolve the matter, in other words to pay £170. Well, I suppose I wait for official court letter or their dismissal letter. I admire their tactics to scare and force people to pay.

patient_dream

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82125735#Comment_82125735

You do understand that Moorside applying a fake £70 is DOUBLE RECOVERY and not allowed in the courts

They may well say it's part of the code of practice … that is rubbish

WHY ? because they rely on a code written by an unregulated ATA and the famous OSNA money scam (ZZPS)

A very foolish legal that thinks that fakery is a law …. IT'S NOT, it's just a scam money making extortion industry

Let's see if Moorside are stupid enough to take a money scam to court

adam1415

So, moorside threatens me with court, apparently they have been instructed to do so. Why a copy of this communication has not been sent to me? This is the latest email from them. Shame they use emails as a communication rather than official letters. I do not know what chances I have to win the case.

Gr1pr

Ignore them, wait for the actual Money Claim to arrive in the post from the CNBC in Northampton ( it will definitely be a claim pack, not an email. )

adam1415

Just a thought. I was thinking.. Has anyone opted for an in-person hearing, in court, with the official request that a person taking photos of a vehicle must be present? Since hearings are far, chances are the person won't come, therefore i may win by a default. Am i correct?

Coupon-mad

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82147552#Comment_82147552

No.

But yes we have stated that in cases.

No it doesn't cause a default win.

I once had a case where I helped a person in an in-person court case and had asked for a WS from the actual ticketer.

Only got a WS from the company, OPS, and when I raised the lack of ticketer witness statement, the Director of OPS who had attended Brighton Court in person told the judge that the ticketer employee was dead.

I managed to keep a straight face despite not believing a damn word. Might have been true, so couldn't look unreasonable.

Won the case after some discussion about poor signage.