Bw Legal and IPSERV Options

[MR CHEEKS]

Hi all, just found this forum, never had a clue it existed.

So I have a friend who back in June had a parking ticket from Ipserv at the University of Suffolk in Ipswich. They alleged that they parked there without purchasing a ticket. This was incorrect as they did buy a ticket but subsequently entered the wrong car reg as they were using a friend's car due to theirs being off the road.

They challenged this through popla but didn't get the fine overturned. They responded back to Ipserv with details of the parking ticket (issued through Ringo), details of the temporary insurance they bought to cover the period their car was off the road, and still they refuse to cancel the ticket. They unwittingly also told them they were the driver even though they weren't keeper.

Ipserv passed the details to Trace and they kept sending letters demanding not only the £100 (increased from 60 due to missed payment) but also another £60 admin fee (payable to trace if assume). They contacted trace to advise them they could not afford the payment and several emails were sent back and forth as they were demanding that they needed an authorised person to speak to them, to give them permission to speak to Ipserv to discuss reducing the fine back to £60 as they even thought the fine was excessive. My friend to this day has never heard back from trace.

Today, my friend received a letter from BW Legal advising they have now taken this over from trace and demanding payment of the £160 or they could face court action.

Their question is, where do they stand and what should their next move be? I've tried trawling through the Web for them but it's a minefield and I really have no clue.

Any help I'm sure would be gratefully received.

Regards

Mr C.

[Advertisement]

[nosferatu1001]

Deny the debt
State they are seeking debt advice - those PRECISE words - and you require they halt processing for a min of 30 days
That gives breathing room for the SAR to go into IPSERV, so you can see all their documentation they hold about your friends personal data.

BW Legal are UTTERLY beatable, especially as I BET they have called the £60 "initial legal costs" - you will find, from reading the MSE FORUM -> Parking -> NEWBIES THREAD at post 2 that they get spanked over this amount on a daily basis.

[MR CHEEKS]

Deny the debt
State they are seeking debt advice - those PRECISE words - and you require they halt processing for a min of 30 days
That gives breathing room for the SAR to go into IPSERV, so you can see all their documentation they hold about your friends personal data.



BW Legal are UTTERLY beatable, especially as I BET they have called the £60 "initial legal costs" - you will find, from reading the MSE FORUM -> Parking -> NEWBIES THREAD at post 2 that they get spanked over this amount on a daily basis.

I'll see if I can get the letter from them and post it here.

So they need to write to them and just say they are seeking debt advice and that they will require a minimum of 30 days?

Can you expand on the need for them to see the documents they hold? Just want to be sure I'm clear in what I tell them, hope you don't mind.

[nosferatu1001]

Well no, you need to tell them the phrasing I used, as there is a reason it was phrased in that matter.

It allows you to see exactly what pictures they have of eg the signs in place at the time. Obviously if they show crap signs - that helps. if it shows NO signs then they have NO evidece as to what the signs looked like on the day

Just do it
Obviously having all the info they can is of help.

[MR CHEEKS]

Well no, you need to tell them the phrasing I used, as there is a reason it was phrased in that matter.

It allows you to see exactly what pictures they have of eg the signs in place at the time. Obviously if they show crap signs - that helps. if it shows NO signs then they have NO evidece as to what the signs looked like on the day

Just do it
Obviously having all the info they can is of help.

Cool, so they'll need to write something like

To whom it may concern

I deny any debt owed to BW Legal.

I am seeking debt advice and I require you to halt the process for a minimum of 30 days.

Regards

Xxxx

[Sheffield Dave]

The alleged debt isn't owed to BWLegal, but rather to their client, ipserv.

[MR CHEEKS]

The alleged debt isn't owed to BWLegal, but rather to their client, ipserv.

Great, I'll tell them to just swap the name BW Legal to Ipserv.

Cheers, anything else they should do? Understand this needs to be written and recorded post rather than email too, I'll let her know that too.

[nosferatu1001]

No, it can be email of course. It is NEVER EVER sent recorded. If by post, it is sent FIRST CLASS with FREE proof of posting. No other method, ever

State why you are denying the debt.

[MR CHEEKS]

No, it can be email of course. It is NEVER EVER sent recorded. If by post, it is sent FIRST CLASS with FREE proof of posting. No other method, ever

State why you are denying the debt.

I didn't mean recorded, I just couldnt remember the term for the method as you described.


So this will be their letter

I deny any debt to Ipserv due to already confirming purchase of parking ticket.

I am seeking debt advise and I require you to halt the process for a minimum of 30 days.

Regards

I think from what I've gathered this is all that is required.

Is their next move to write to Ipserv with a SAR? I'll search for a template unless someone has a link to one

Cheers all

[nosferatu1001]

advice.

require you to halt processing of my data for a minimum of 30 days

Yes, but you dont need a template. Youre requesting ALL your data. ALL of it. Not a tricky request!

[MR CHEEKS]

advice.

require you to halt processing of my data for a minimum of 30 days

Yes, but you dont need a template. Youre requesting ALL your data. ALL of it. Not a tricky request!

Super, sorry if I come across naive, it's because in this situation I am. Just trying to help a friend who is probably even less savvy than me.

Once they write to Ipserv and ask about the Sat, what would their next move be? As mentioned her popla appeal failed but at that time I do not think they had the extra evidence to prove she wasn't driving her regular car, so the input of the incorrect reg plate was totally human error. The fact of the matter is no revenue was lost as a ticket was purchased. I'm sure any reasonable judge would dismiss this but she could do without the hassle of court action as I'm essence its being brought about by the university she is studying at, ipserv look after the carpark. The uni also agreed this was unfair yet they didn't want to know.

[nosferatu1001]

SAR.

Their next step is to prepare for the inevitable legal claim, by reading the MSE Forum NEWBIES thread, 2nd post in there (post numbers have gone on the new format, ugh) for the 17 example defences.

Loss of revenue is not a defence, strictly. Not since Beavis.

Youre naive, yes, but thats expected. Youre new. BUt you need to realise that until you do more research, that what you think is a defence might not be of any use.

Did they agree it was unfair in writing? If YES this gives you a further defence - that there is no justification.

[MR CHEEKS]

SAR.

Their next step is to prepare for the inevitable legal claim, by reading the MSE Forum NEWBIES thread, 2nd post in there (post numbers have gone on the new format, ugh) for the 17 example defences.

Loss of revenue is not a defence, strictly. Not since Beavis.

Youre naive, yes, but thats expected. Youre new. BUt you need to realise that until you do more research, that what you think is a defence might not be of any use.

Did they agree it was unfair in writing? If YES this gives you a further defence - that there is no justification.

The University agreed that the fine was excessive and asked Ipserv if there was anything they could so. yes I believe she does have that on an email. From memory, they rejected it as she had already gone through popla.

[nosferatu1001]

It isnt and never has been a fine. Never use the "F" word!
BElief is insufficient. Get the email and check.

[MR CHEEKS]

SAR.

Their next step is to prepare for the inevitable legal claim, by reading the MSE Forum NEWBIES thread, 2nd post in there (post numbers have gone on the new format, ugh) for the 17 example defences.

Loss of revenue is not a defence, strictly. Not since Beavis.

Youre naive, yes, but thats expected. Youre new. BUt you need to realise that until you do more research, that what you think is a defence might not be of any use.

Did they agree it was unfair in writing? If YES this gives you a further defence - that there is no justification.

OK do I checked out mse and it seems they have dealt with an almost identical issue. The problem is the link seems to be broken

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showth...78#post74836178

Anyone able to help me with this?

[nosferatu1001]

Where did you get the link from? Bearing in mind the forum has been newly ported across, you need to give us a link that works otherwise we've got no idea at all.

[MR CHEEKS]

Where did you get the link from? Bearing in mind the forum has been newly ported across, you need to give us a link that works otherwise we've got no idea at all.

It came direct from the newbie thread on mse. I'll carry on searching.

[nosferatu1001]

As I said, the forum has JUST been ported so its possible theyve broken old links. Hopefully the author will fix.

[MR CHEEKS]

Deny the debt
State they are seeking debt advice - those PRECISE words - and you require they halt processing for a min of 30 days
That gives breathing room for the SAR to go into IPSERV, so you can see all their documentation they hold about your friends personal data.

BW Legal are UTTERLY beatable, especially as I BET they have called the £60 "initial legal costs" - you will find, from reading the MSE FORUM -> Parking -> NEWBIES THREAD at post 2 that they get spanked over this amount on a daily basis.

So my friend denied the debt and asked for all action to cease for a minimum of 30 days.

She just had this back, assume she should ignore?

Afternoon



Thank you for your email, the contents of which have been noted on file.



Please be advised that you have previously appealed this matter directly to Our Client.



Our Client rejected your appeal and sent you an appeal rejection letter. This letter outlined reasons for the rejection and detailed how you should proceed if you wished to appeal this matter further. This must have been done within a set timeframe, specified in the aforementioned letter.



As no further appeal was forthcoming, your recourse for appeal has now expired and the full Balance is due and owing.





Should you wish to discuss this matter further, please contact our office on ‪0113 487 0432‬.



Kind Regards,



bwlegal

Regards

Cheeks.

[nosferatu1001]

No, you respond back, denying the debt and stating that AS PER the pre action protocol., they are INSTRUCTED to cease processing for at least 30 days while you seek debt advice

Confirm that you have done this, else you will be rported to the SRA for yet another breach of your professional duties.