URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 90815--------------------------------------------------
       Re: No reply from NCP and now getting solicitor letters
   DIR By: jfollows
       Date: September 21, 2025, 6:41 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I suggest you call the court first thing tomorrow to verify the
       status of the case. There are many reasons why the case may have
       been discontinued without your knowledge, it shouldn’t happen
       but it does.
       #Post#: 90825--------------------------------------------------
       Re: No reply from NCP and now getting solicitor letters
   DIR By: b789
       Date: September 21, 2025, 7:54 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       The first thing you ask is whether there trial fee has been paid
       by the claimant. If it has, this means that there is still a
       possibility that the hearing will go ahead. However, Moorside
       Legal are known to discontinue 24 hours before the hearing date.
       If they do, you will be able to ask for costs.
       Due to a very recent High Court appeal case which is binding on
       the lower courts, it has been found that paralegals/non-admitted
       staff cannot conduct litigation merely because their firm is
       authorised; they may only support an authorised litigator. SO,
       we need to see the names of every person that has signed
       anything or written to you since the claim was issued.
       Any person conducting litigation without the prior authorisation
       is committing a criminal offence. So, who signed the N1SDT Claim
       Form with the PoC, the N180 DQ, their Witness Statement and
       anything else that has been corresponded to you since the claim
       was issued. This firm of utter incompetents masquerading as a
       bilk litigator, will get their comeuppance soon.
       Where on earth is the first page of their WS with points 1-4 and
       where is the Statement of Truth (SoT)? You should have shown
       EVERY page of their WS, especially if it contains a name or a
       signature!!!
       Please answer the above questions first.
       #Post#: 90844--------------------------------------------------
       Re: No reply from NCP and now getting solicitor letters
   DIR By: NBSCMN
       Date: September 21, 2025, 10:42 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: b789 link ---
       >
       > The first thing you ask is whether there trial fee has been
       paid by the claimant. If it has, this means that there is still
       a possibility that the hearing will go ahead. However, Moorside
       Legal are known to discontinue 24 hours before the hearing date.
       If they do, you will be able to ask for costs.
       >
       > Due to a very recent High Court appeal case which is binding
       on the lower courts, it has been found that
       paralegals/non-admitted staff cannot conduct litigation merely
       because their firm is authorised; they may only support an
       authorised litigator. SO, we need to see the names of every
       person that has signed anything or written to you since the
       claim was issued.
       >
       > Any person conducting litigation without the prior
       authorisation is committing a criminal offence. So, who signed
       the N1SDT Claim Form with the PoC, the N180 DQ, their Witness
       Statement and anything else that has been corresponded to you
       since the claim was issued. This firm of utter incompetents
       masquerading as a bilk litigator, will get their comeuppance
       soon.
       >
       > Where on earth is the first page of their WS with points 1-4
       and where is the Statement of Truth (SoT)? You should have shown
       EVERY page of their WS, especially if it contains a name or a
       signature!!!
       >
       > Please answer the above questions first.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       the first page of the WS i reuploaded the document as per my
       previous message
  HTML https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1-pRIcabSZ1m8F1e1dPJrjjQzKZNlSpza
       #Post#: 90848--------------------------------------------------
       Re: No reply from NCP and now getting solicitor letters
   DIR By: NBSCMN
       Date: September 21, 2025, 11:27 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       `Safina Zubair
       --- signed the witness statement
       and
       Ibrar Ahmad  signed the N1SDT claim
       The N180 copy that was sent to me was just signed by 'Moorside
       Legal'
       I cant seem to find anything else at the moment. I will contact
       the court tomorrow.
  HTML https://imgur.com/a/i58L2WF
       #Post#: 90862--------------------------------------------------
       Re: No reply from NCP and now getting solicitor letters
   DIR By: b789
       Date: September 21, 2025, 3:25 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Send the following email immediately to help@moorsidelegal.co.uk
       and CC yourself:
       --- Quote ---
       > Subject: Clarification required regarding conduct of
       litigation by non-authorised person
       >
       > Dear Ms Rebecca Horton-Grainger,
       >
       > I am writing in relation to the witness statement signed by Ms
       Safina Zubair in National Car Parks Ltd] v [Defendant], Claim
       No. M8MP864A. At paragraph 1 of that statement, Ms Zubair
       describes herself as:
       >
       > [indent]“a Paralegal employed by Moorside and I have conduct
       of this matter subject to the supervision of my
       Principal.”[/indent]
       >
       > That assertion causes me serious concern. As you are aware,
       the conduct of litigation is a reserved legal activity under the
       Legal Services Act 2007. In Mazur & Ors v CRS LLP [2025] EWHC
       1710 (Ch), the High Court held unambiguously that a
       non-authorised individual cannot conduct litigation, whether
       supervised or not. Employment by, or supervision within, an
       authorised firm does not entitle an unqualified person to
       conduct litigation.
       >
       > I therefore require your clarification as COLP:
       >
       > [indent]1. Does Ms Zubair in fact have conduct of this matter?
       > 2. If not, why has her witness statement expressly stated
       otherwise?
       > 3. Who is the authorised person at Moorside who has true
       conduct of this litigation, and who is exercising professional
       judgment and responsibility in accordance with the SRA
       Principles and Code of Conduct?[/indent]
       >
       > I also note that your cover letter to the court accompanying
       the trial bundle is signed only in the name of “Moorside Legal
       Services Ltd.” This letter includes a settlement proposal. As
       this is a document submitted to the court in active proceedings,
       I require confirmation of:
       >
       > [indent]• The name of the individual who drafted and signed
       this correspondence; and
       > • That this individual is personally authorised to conduct
       litigation within the meaning of the Legal Services Act
       2007.[/indent]
       >
       > For the avoidance of doubt, if it transpires that a paralegal
       or any other non-authorised person has had conduct of this
       litigation or has been performing reserved acts, I will report
       the matter to the SRA as a regulatory breach, and I will invite
       the court to apply Mazur in relation to costs consequences for
       improper conduct of litigation.
       >
       > Please provide your clarification within 7 days.
       >
       > Yours faithfully,
       >
       > [Your Full Name]
       > [Your Address]
       --- End Quote ---
       When you receive a response, please show us. I believe that by
       permitting an unauthorised person to conduct litigation, there
       has been a breach of the Legal Services Act, which is a criminal
       mater and the person and the employing firm should be reported
       to the SRA.
       #Post#: 90908--------------------------------------------------
       Re: No reply from NCP and now getting solicitor letters
   DIR By: NBSCMN
       Date: September 22, 2025, 5:04 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hello
       I have sent that email to moorside.
       I have also called to see if the trial fee has been paid and
       they told me that there is no logs to confirm payment has been
       made however it may be still processing and that I should assume
       it has been paid unless I am notified otherwise.
       #Post#: 91871--------------------------------------------------
       Re: No reply from NCP and now getting solicitor letters
   DIR By: NBSCMN
       Date: September 28, 2025, 1:30 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I still haven't received a reply from Moorside/
       I've sent a chase up email today but their auto email said they
       reply within 5 days which they havent.
       #Post#: 91915--------------------------------------------------
       Re: No reply from NCP and now getting solicitor letters
   DIR By: b789
       Date: September 29, 2025, 3:47 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I have no idea what you actually sent as a 'chase up' but there
       a few things you need to do. First I suggest you send another
       email to help@moorsidelegal.co.uk with the following:
       --- Quote ---
       > Subject: Urgent: Non-response re conduct of litigation (COLP
       clarification)
       >
       > Dear Compliance Officer for Legal Practice (COLP),
       >
       > Further to my email of [date], no response has been received
       within the 7-day deadline. In light of the absence of any
       clarification, I have today submitted a report to the SRA
       concerning the following:
       >
       > [indent]• Ms Safina Zubair’s witness statement asserting: “I
       am a Paralegal … and I have conduct of this matter subject to
       the supervision of my Principal.”
       > • Your bundle cover letter filed to the court signed only as
       “Moorside Legal Services Ltd”, which also contained a settlement
       proposal, with no named individual or status.[/indent]
       >
       > Please provide, within 48 hours:
       >
       > [indent]1. The name and professional status of the person at
       Moorside who has conduct of these proceedings and who is
       personally authorised to conduct litigation;
       > 2. The name and professional status of the individual who
       drafted and sent the cover letter to the court, and confirmation
       that they are personally authorised to conduct litigation;
       > 3. Confirmation that all reserved acts in these proceedings
       have been undertaken by an authorised person, and if any were
       not, what remedial steps you will now take.[/indent]
       >
       > For the avoidance of doubt, I will place this correspondence
       before the court and rely on Mazur & Anor v CRS LLP [2025] EWHC
       2341 (KB) when addressing conduct and costs.
       >
       > Please note that this email is my final 48-hour chaser. An SRA
       report has been submitted, and I will update the SRA if your
       response arrives.
       >
       > Yours faithfully,
       >
       > [Your full name]
       --- End Quote ---
       At the same time, you notify the court with an email for the
       file to
       Enquiries.kingston.countycourt[member=6517]justice[/member].gov.uk
       and you CC help@moorsidelegal.co.uk and yourself:
       --- Quote ---
       > Subject: M8MP864A – Conduct of litigation issue; SRA referral;
       request to note and reserve costs
       >
       > Dear Sir/Madam,
       >
       > I write to record that Moorside Legal Services Ltd (for the
       Claimant) has not responded to my 7-day request for
       clarification after their paralegal, Ms Safina Zubair, stated in
       her witness statement that she “has conduct of this matter
       subject to the supervision of [her] Principal”. A bundle cover
       letter was also filed signed only “Moorside Legal Services Ltd”,
       containing a settlement proposal, with no named individual or
       status.
       >
       > Given the proximity of the hearing, I have reported the matter
       to the SRA and sent a 48-hour final chaser to the firm’s
       Compliance Officer of Legal Practice (COLP) today. I
       respectfully invite the Court to (i) note the issue, (ii) direct
       the Claimant to identify on the record the authorised individual
       with conduct and to confirm that all reserved acts have been
       undertaken by that person, and (iii) reserve costs arising from
       any improper conduct, with reference to Mazur & Anor v CRS LLP
       [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB).
       >
       > I also enclose a concise Costs note (CPR 27.14(2)(g)) limited
       to the unnecessary work caused by the conduct issue raised
       herein. If required, I respectfully seek the Court’s permission
       to rely on this short note at the hearing. Copies served on the
       Claimant’s solicitors today.
       >
       > Yours faithfully,
       >
       > [Your full name]
       >
       > [Your address]
       --- End Quote ---
       Include the following costs note with the above email (adapt the
       times if necessary at the LiP rate of £19/hour:
       --- Quote ---
       > IN THE COUNTY COURT AT KINGSTON UPON THAMES
       > Claim No.: M8MP864A
       > Between: National Car Parks Ltd (Claimant) and [your full
       name] (Defendant)
       >
       > Costs note – unreasonable conduct (CPR 27.14(2)(g))
       >
       > Background
       > [indent]1. The Claimant’s paralegal, Ms Safina Zubair, states
       in her witness statement that she “has conduct of this matter
       subject to the supervision of [her] Principal”.
       > 2. The Claimant also filed a court cover letter signed only as
       “Moorside Legal Services Ltd”, which included a settlement
       proposal but did not identify the individual author or their
       professional status.
       > 3. Those features have required me to take issue, write to the
       firm’s COLP, prepare regulatory correspondence, and address the
       point for the Court, increasing time and cost.[/indent]
       >
       > Law
       > [indent]4. Conduct of litigation is a reserved activity. The
       High Court in Mazur & Anor v CRS LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB)
       confirms that non-authorised employees cannot conduct
       litigation, even under supervision; employment/supervision does
       not confer entitlement.
       > 5. Under CPR 27.14(2)(g) the Court may order costs where a
       party has behaved unreasonably in bringing, defending, or
       conducting proceedings.[/indent]
       >
       > Application to the facts
       > [indent]6. The paralegal’s express assertion that she “has
       conduct” (even “subject to supervision”) conflicts with Mazur.
       > 7. Filing a court document bearing only the firm’s name—and
       containing a settlement proposal—without identifying the
       authorised individual responsible obscures accountability for
       reserved acts.
       > 8. That conduct has been unreasonable, necessitating
       additional work by the Defendant to safeguard the integrity of
       the proceedings and regulatory compliance.[/indent]
       >
       > Costs sought (summary schedule)
       > [indent]9. I ask the Court to award costs under CPR
       27.14(2)(g) at the LiP rate of £19/hour, limited strictly to the
       unnecessary work caused by the above, namely:
       >
       > [2:00] Reviewing WS wording and researching Mazur – £38.00
       > [0:30] Drafting COLP letter and chaser – £9.50
       > [1:00] Preparing SRA report email (and exhibits) – £19.00
       > [0:30] Preparing this costs note and short oral submissions –
       £9.50
       >
       > Subtotal: £76.00
       >
       > Total claimed: £76.00[/indent]
       >
       > 10. The Defendant respectfully invites the Court to:
       > [indent](a) find that the Claimant’s conduct has been
       unreasonable within r.27.14(2)(g); and
       > (b) award the Defendant the limited costs set out
       above.[/indent]
       --- End Quote ---
       You download this SRA Report Form
  HTML https://www.sra.org.uk/globalassets/documents/consumers/report-solicitor-form.docx?version=4a80ca,<br
       />complete it and email it back to report@sra.org.uk and CC
       yourself. Use the following to guide you through the form:
       --- Quote ---
       > Firm: Moorside Legal Services Ltd (ABS).
       > Matter: National Car Parks Ltd v [Defendant], Claim No.
       M8MP864A, hearing listed [8 October 2025, 11:45].
       >
       > Summary of concern:
       > A paralegal, Ms Safina Zubair, signed a witness statement
       stating: “I am a Paralegal employed by Moorside and I have
       conduct of this matter subject to the supervision of my
       Principal.” The firm also filed a bundle cover letter to the
       court signed only as “Moorside Legal Services Ltd” which
       included a settlement proposal, without identifying the
       individual author or their status. My concern is that a
       non-authorised individual is asserting conduct of litigation and
       potentially performing reserved acts.
       >
       > Why this engages SRA regulation:
       > Conduct of litigation is a reserved activity. The High Court
       in Mazur & Anor v CRS LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) held that
       non-authorised employees cannot “conduct litigation” even if
       supervised; employment/supervision does not confer entitlement.
       The witness statement wording is inconsistent with that position
       and may reflect improper conduct within an SRA-regulated ABS.
       The unsigned (by individual) court letter compounds the concern
       by obscuring who is responsible for reserved steps and whether
       they are authorised.
       >
       > Chronology:
       > [indent]• [Date] – Claimant’s witness statement served;
       wording quoted above.
       > • [Date] – Bundle cover letter filed to court, signed only
       “Moorside Legal Services Ltd”, including a settlement proposal.
       > • [Date] – I wrote to the firm’s COLP seeking clarification
       and identification of the authorised individual with conduct;
       7-day deadline given.
       > • [Date] – No response received.
       > • [Today’s date] – Report submitted to the SRA; 48-hour final
       chaser sent to COLP.[/indent]
       >
       > Potential breaches:
       > [indent]• Reserved legal activities undertaken/held out by
       non-authorised person (Legal Services Act 2007; SRA
       Principles/Code).
       > • Failure to ensure proper supervision and clarity of
       responsibility; opacity as to who is conducting litigation;
       potential misrepresentation to the court.[/indent]
       >
       > Outcome sought:
       > [indent]• Regulatory review of Moorside’s arrangements for
       conduct of litigation.
       > • Confirmation/correction that only authorised individuals
       have conduct and perform reserved acts; identification of the
       authorised individual on the court record.
       > • Any remediation the SRA deems appropriate, including
       guidance to prevent recurrence.[/indent]
       >
       > Attachments (to upload):
       > [indent]1. Extract of Ms Zubair’s witness statement (with
       “have conduct” wording highlighted).
       > 2. Copy of the court cover letter signed “Moorside Legal
       Services Ltd”.
       > 3. My email to the COLP dated [date] and proof of
       non-response.
       > 4. Today’s 48-hour chaser.
       > 5. Hearing notice (for context).[/indent]
       --- End Quote ---
       You don't have much time so please get this done today.
       #Post#: 91967--------------------------------------------------
       Re: No reply from NCP and now getting solicitor letters
   DIR By: NBSCMN
       Date: September 29, 2025, 6:53 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Thank you for this. I have done all but completed the SRA form,
       I need to confirm the dates and upload the documents which I
       will when I get home from work today.
       #Post#: 92909--------------------------------------------------
       Re: No reply from NCP and now getting solicitor letters
   DIR By: NBSCMN
       Date: October 5, 2025, 9:36 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       SRA form was sent on 30/9
       No emails received from any party yet. Can anyone give me
       guidance on what I need to do for my hearing this Wednesday
       please
       Thank you
       *****************************************************
       Page 4 of 6
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page