BWLegal - the list of failures growing

beamerguy · 1 July 2017 at 12:25PM

=======================================
Interesting thread from someone will not accept the rubbish
BWLegal dish out
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5941170
=======================================
BW Legal Incompetence Hits New Low
https://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2016/12/excel-bw-legal-incompetence-hits-new-low.html
=======================================
TRUSTPILOT ABOUT BWLEGAL ....
You are not alone and your story could help others.
https://uk.trustpilot.com/review/bwlegal.co.uk
(Ignore the post by Shelley, very clearly a fake review)

WARNING: Are you receiving unsolicited phone calls from BWLegal chasing unproven debts ?? HARASSMENT PHONE CALLS
Such parking so called debts can only be proven by a judge in County Court

If you are being pestered by BWLegal, write to them requesting they cease and that all communications should be by letter only.
REGARDLESS, BLOCK BWLEGAL ON YOUR PHONE

If BWLegal ignore you, complain to the SRA (Solicitors Regulation Authority)
https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/problems.page

ALSO COMPLAIN TO THE ICO
You can report nuisance calls and spam texts to the ICO here
https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint/nuisance-calls-and-messages/spam-texts-and-nuisance-calls/

From 17/12/18 directors responsible for illegal calls will be personally fined
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6502569/Nuisance-call-bosses-face-fines-500-000.html

======================================
BWLEGAL ADD ON A FAKE £60 ?
In addition to the 'parking charge', the Claimant's legal representatives, BWLegal, have artificially inflated the value of the Claim by adding costs of £60 which has not actually been incurred by the Claimant, and which are artificially invented figures in an attempt to circumvent the Small Claims costs rules using double recovery. >>>> thanks to bargepole

12th June 2019
Southampton court threw out a case from BWLegal because of Abuse of Process regarding the fake BWLegal add-on. READ ALL ABOUT IT .... POST #10
Claim number is F0DP201T District Judge Taylor
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=75917866&posted=1#post75917866
======================================
The Administration of Justice Act <<< it matters to you

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=75234858#post75234858
======================================
THE FCA which BWLegal are regulated by,
As you know, the FCA recently told WONGA to repay £2.6 million
for unfair debt collection practices and adding fake amounts. This
is what BWLegal are doing and so a complaint to the FCA is in order
https://www.fca.org.uk/news/press-releases/wonga-pay-redress-unfair-debt-collection-practices
======================================
On the subject of double recovery ... Gladstones solicitors also
try the £60 scam on. A case in Basingstoke on the 16th Jan
2019 ... "The judge laughed and said something along the lines. "It doesn't surprise me you don't want to pursue the additional £60 because it's not the first time we met and you already know I wouldn't allow this additional costs to be awarded".
SAME APPLIES TO BWLEGAL
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5869422
=======================================

THE BWLEGAL FAILURES

Mahone1302 V EXCEL and BWLEGAL >> 29th April 2019
READ THE FULL STORY HERE POST # 126
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5477023

Ms. Devenster Macklow loses another claim for BW Legal. Elliott v Loake and CPS v AJH Films not relevant
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/ms-devenster-macklow-loses-another.html

BW Legal try Elliott v Loake and CPS v AJH Films yet again. Yawn. Claim dismissed
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/bw-legal-try-elliott-v-loake-and-cps-v.html

BW Legal forget to pay court fee
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/bw-legal-forget-to-pay-court-fee.html

Judge "fed up" with BW Legal
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/judge-fed-up-with-bw-legal.html

Excel lose "driver left leisure park" claim. BW legal are "cr*p" and "don't engage in a thought process"
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/excel-lose-driver-left-leisure-park.html

Excel lose in Cardiff. Judge explains why Elliott v Loake and CPS v AJH films not relevant
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/excel-lose-in-cardiff-judge-explains.html

VCS slapped with costs for unreasonableness. Elliot v Loake and CPS v AJH Films are not relevant
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/vcs-slapped-with-costs-for.html

Motorist wins appeal - CPS vs AJH Films does not transfer liability from driver to keeper
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/motorist-wins-appeal-cps-vs-ajh-films.html

Excel lose - Elliot v Loake/CPS v AJH films rubbished by judge
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/excel-v-ms-x-c8dp5c7t.html

beamerguy · 1 July 2017 at 11:36PM

Remember Newbies, in a county court there is not a precedence,
unlike higher courts.

You can however refer to the above cases and I doubt if any judge in county court would rule against or disagree with their fellow judges

The BWLegal claim of Elliott v Loake and CPS v AJH Films
is now dead in the water

Coupon-mad · 1 July 2017 at 11:39PM

The BWLegal claim of Elliott v Loake and CPS v AJH Films is now dead in the water

It is, as long as people know what to argue and their local court isn't Wigan!

beamerguy · 1 July 2017 at 11:49PM

Coupon-mad wrote: »

It is, as long as people know what to argue and their local court isn't Wigan!

Yes but would any judge at Wigan ignore the overwhelming
evidence and responses of other courts once shown ??

Probably BWLegal are now working nights to find the next
load of rubbish

Coupon-mad · 2 July 2017 at 12:20AM

Only the 'Appeal level' decisions are persuasive on the County courts, though.

System · 2 July 2017 at 6:30AM

Yes but would any judge at Wigan ignore the overwhelming
evidence and responses of other courts once shown ??

Some drivers have printed these out and given them to a judge. The judge though agreed with C-M words about the "level" of court i.e. Appeals, High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court.

The judge then added in the comments that she would have needed the official transcript as well anyway.

So though BM's advice is logical, it is not the way the courts work.

beamerguy · 2 July 2017 at 9:40AM

IamEmanresu wrote: »

Some drivers have printed these out and given them to a judge. The judge though agreed with C-M words about the "level" of court i.e. Appeals, High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court.

The judge then added in the comments that she would have needed the official transcript as well anyway.

So though BM's advice is logical, it is not the way the courts work.

Thanks IamEmanresu and so questions please

Do BWLegal provide an official transcript of the two cases
they refer and does not the judge have each case on record with the courts database

pappa_golf · 2 July 2017 at 10:22AM

beamerguy wrote: »

Thanks IamEmanresu and so questions please

Do BWLegal provide an official transcript of the two cases
they refer and does not the judge have each case on record with the courts database

one has to pay for an official transcript , PP keeps many in stock to be loaned out when needed

PS , latest PP today , gladstones bite the dist yet again , http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/07/gladstones-discontinue-heath-parade.html

beamerguy · 2 July 2017 at 10:38AM

pappa_golf wrote: »

one has to pay for an official transcript , PP keeps many in stock to be loaned out when needed

PS , latest PP today , gladstones bite the dist yet again , http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/07/gladstones-discontinue-heath-parade.html

Pappa, can i suggest you show gladstones as a new thread as this one is for BWLegal

We can then build on that.
This is for newbies so they have a better understanding

After all, the PPC's proudly display their wins on their sites

Parking-Prankster · 2 July 2017 at 11:42AM

I, and several other like minded and generous people, fund getting transcripts when we feel they are useful.

This needs the co-operation of the defendant, as they have to order it and then get refunded once it is ready.

I try and get a cross-section of different judgments to illustrate different winning arguments, rather than a whole lot of cases, which say, show Elliott v Loake and CPM v AJH Films to be not relevant.

beamerguy · 4 July 2017 at 12:02PM

BWLegal/VCS lose again

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5567539

POST #304

BWLegal - the list of failures growing

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free