Non Practising Solicitor threatening court for nursery dinner debt

[cerberusalert]

I can't understand why she would want to sign a letter of demand how she did unless she wanted you to believe she was acting as a solicitor & had some magical legal powers that mere mortals don't.

[bubbsie1]

Hi Joe Blogs

 

perhaps you should write to this woman/nursery and explain as a fully qualified practising mother you relied on the understanding given by the manager that he would inform you if your daughter did not qualify for free meals; he said nothing therefore it is reasonable for you to assume she was entitled to free meals.

 

In relying on his advice you have found yourself at a disadvantage and in those circumstances you should not be held responsible for the costs.

 

Its called estoppel; estoppel is:

 

a bar or impediment preventing a party from asserting a fact or a claim inconsistent with a position that party previously took, either by conduct or words, especially where a representation has been relied or acted upon by others.

 

 

So if you are given advice/a promise that you have relied on and in doing so you have acted to your detriment the other party is estopped from denying that (i.e it's their fault! cos you relied on the advice of the manager to tell you if your daughter was entitled and he did not inform you you have to pay).

 

As for the nursery assistant if she doesn't have a practising certificate she is not working as a solicitor and is either having a break or is retired; she can refer to herself as a non-practising solicitor if she is still on the register.

 

However what is the point in her referring to herself in that capacity; if she is giving legal advice in the course of a business, and it appears she is, she should have a practising certificate, have a look on the solicitors regulation authority web site.

 

She is trying to intimidate you by using that title,it's not on.

 

 

Good luck

Edited April 18, 2011 by bubbsie1

[joeblogs]

Thanks to you all, you are all absolutely wonderful and I cannot thank you all enough. When my head is together and I have got my mum washed and dressed (some of you kind folks my remember me from the Benefits Forum, my mum is mentally disabled and I am her full time carer), I will write and letter and put the copy of this thread.

 

Again, thank you all so much, I feel so much better already. What with mum, my two little ones and a husband, my life is full enough already without the threats of this old maid.

[joeblogs]

As promised, here is the draft letter thanks to you all for your help. If anyone thinks there should be any alternations, please let me know.

 

Re: Alledged School Dinner Money Debt

Thank you for your letter dated 14 April 2011, the contents of which have been carefully noted.

It would appear from your comments that you do not have the full facts to hand as per my previous correspondence, or you have chosen to ignore them. I will gladly put you right on a number of issues you have raised but first I would just like to bring you back down a peg or two and inform you that I have indeed sought legal advice with your claims that you will be pursuing legal action regarding the disputed amount of £49.95.

Secondly, I have also taken the time to speak with the Law society, and upon their advice, I have sent them copies of your correspondence claiming to be a "Non-Practicing Solicitor" and they are looking into the matter. As you are clearly providing legal advice in the course of a business, you should have a practicing certificate.

Thirdly, have spoken to XXXXXX County Council and I will be lodging an official complaint against the disgraceful attitude and the veiled threats contained in your correspondence. They stated that you have made ‘a very poor statement and not one expected to be voiced by a service provider’.

Furthermore, I intend to write to Ofsted sending them copies of your correspondence.

I understand by looking on their website, your nursery reference number EYXXXXX, that the last inspection the nursery underwent was 19.10.2006. With the attitude you are displaying, I believe that an up to date inspection should be scheduled forthwith.

 

Demanding that I pay £5.50 a week and that I must respond to you by a certain date is extremely rude and offensive, and most certainly not what one would expect from someone of your position. Indeed, I feel that your fitness to hold such a ‘title’ is somewhat questionable!

 

I look forward to your response, and explanation as to why the acting manager found it impossible to tell a parent that their child was, in fact, NOT entitled to free meals for over 4 months? Due to the acting manager’s failure to provide the above information, I am now at a disadvantage and given this breakdown in communication I should not be held responsible for the alleged debt.

As you are a non-practicing solicitor, you will understand the legal term ‘estoppel’. To clarify, estoppel is a bar or impediment preventing a party from asserting a fact or a claim inconsistent with a position that party previously took, either by conduct or words, especially where a representation has been relied or acted upon by others.

So if you are given advice/a promise that you have relied upon and in doing so you have acted to your detriment, the other party is estopped from denying that. Simplified, it is your fault as I relied on the advice of the acting manager to tell me that my daughter was not entitled to free school meals. Had I have known she was not entitled to free school meals, I would have sent her with a packed lunch. I was, however, denied this option due to your managers breakdown of communication and therefore, the onus remains with you to pay XXXXX Catering and not expect me to suffer financial hardship due to your error.

It is in your interest to open up a mature dialogue with me surrounding this issue caused solely by the 'acting manager' at the time. I furthermore request that you refrain from attempting to threaten and intimidate me with your claim to be a 'non-practicing solicitor' 'claiming fixed costs and Court costs' and 'statutory interest' then you will find this issue can possibly be brought to a satisfactory conclusion.

As a gesture of goodwill, and ‘without prejudice’, I will offer a full and final settlement of this alleged debt of £7.40 being the equivalent of the cost of four days school meals over a two week period. This, in my opinion, was sufficient time in order for your acting manager to have sought the information and communicated it back to myself that my daughter was not entitled to free school meals. In fact, during my discussions with XXXXXX County Council they said ‘forget two weeks, two hours should have sufficed’.

 

I hope that any future correspondence you send demonstrates that you are able to treat me with respect, or do you to believe that by mentioning the word ‘solicitor’ that you have some magical legal powers that us mere mortals don't? Furthermore, as suggested by XXXXXX County Council, an apology would not go amiss!

Finally, upon the recommendation of XXXXXX County Council, I want this correspondence recorded as an official complaint.

Yours sincerely

[bubbsie1]

Hi JB

 

wow that's certainly giving her both barrels!!

 

You certainly need to be assertive and direct in your dealings with the nursery; however it might be more effective if you tone down the obvious frustration and angst she has caused you and just state the facts simply and without any personal references i.e 'bring you down a peg or two'.

 

Also never a good idea to say you are doing this or that i.e 'as you are clearly providing legal advice' might be better to say 'I believe' in the circumstances.

 

If you like I could amend the letter with a few suggestions and sent it back to you.

 

I would not make a full and final settlement, since you are stating you are not responsible for the debt there is no need.

 

Never let the other side know what your 'hand' is suffice to say you have spoken to xxxxxxx and xxxxxx.

 

No offence meant by my criticisms they are meant to be constructive.

 

Let me know if you want a hand ammending the letter.

 

Bubbsie

[joeblogs]

Hi Bubbsie 1

 

Thank you for your feedback, I would be most greatful if you want to make any amendments. Thanks for your input.

[bubbsie1]

Hi JB

 

something along these lines might be appropriate;please bear in mind I am not a solicitor and my views are formed my own experience.:

[bubbsie1]

Sorry JB had problems copying that here it is now:

 

 

without prejudice

 

 

Thank you for your letter dated 14 April 2011, your comments have been carefully noted; it would appear from the contents you are not in full possession of the facts relating to this matter.

 

I suggest before you respond to this letter you familiarise yourself with my previous correspondence.

 

As stated I spoke with the Manager Mr XXXXX on XX XX XX and asked him to advise me if my daughter was entitled to free school meals.

 

The manager said he would get back to me if she was not entitled to free school meals so I could make alternative arrangements if necessary.

 

Mr XXXXXX did not come back to me during the four months my daughter ate at the nursery therefore I reasonably believed my daughter was entitled to free lunches.

 

Had I been advised, as promised by your manager, my daughter was not entitled to free meals I could have sent her with a packed lunch and all of this unpleasantness and the threat of legal action and costs would have been avoided.

 

Firstly let me say I take the threat of legal action/costs very seriously and have taken advice on the matter.

 

In the circumstances I am surprised and disappointed you did not hear my account of the incident before you chose to threaten me with legal action, fixed costs, court costs' and 'statutory interest'.

 

As a non-practising solicitor you must be aware that if I have relied on the advice/judgement of your manager and in doing so I have acted to my detriment then it is not my fault.

 

Clearly his failure to keep to the promise he made and the indication by his conduct that my daughter was entitled to free meals has left me with a financial burden I can ill afford.

 

In the circumstances I do not consider I am responsible for this debt given your managers advice/ conduct.

 

 

I am not a lawyer by any standards, however, I understand this principle is referred to as estoppel; something, no doubt you are more than familiar with.

 

Furthermore my understanding of the role of a non-practising solicitor is that in order for them to give legal advice in the course of a business they must hold a practising certificate.

 

Are you the nursery’s legal advisor?

 

 

 

 

If so I will be contacting the Law Society and The Solicitors Regulations Authority to confirm whether you should be acting in such a role since I understand you do not hold a current practising certificate.

 

In order for me to decide whether I need to contact the above authorities please clarify your position and role at the nursery.

 

I am not responsible for this debt and will vigorously defend any proposed court action; in the circumstances I deserve an explanation and an apology.

 

Please accept this letter as a formal complaint.

 

Make any further adjustments you feel necessary and decide if you want to send it. I am not a solicitor my views and advice are based on my own experiences/education so if you feel you want to seek further advice do.

 

Good luck

Edited April 19, 2011 by bubbsie1

[joeblogs]

Hi Bubbsie

 

Thanks for sending your revised version of the letter. The only problem is, I have already sent copies of the nursery correspondence and my previous correspondence to the Law Society as they requested I did this. (I have not sent my original version of my letter out yet as the children are on half term).

 

Therefore, I would have to amend the section relating to the Law Society.

 

Thanks

[Bazooka Boo]

I hope that any future correspondence you send demonstrates that you are able to treat me with respect, or do you to believe that by mentioning the word ‘solicitor’ that you have some magical legal powers that us mere mortals don't? Furthermore, as suggested by XXXXXX County Council, an apology would not go amiss!

 

I must admit that is a very good letter and one you should be proud of, the only part of that I would change is the above sentence in red, either cut it completely or reword it a little less personal, something like "your use of the word 'solicitor' is a clear indication of your attempt to intimidate and threaten me as though I am unable to make a valid defence and possibly string an educated sentence together" Again this issue has been raised with the relevant organisations who are making the relevant investigations.

[jocko]

"We mere mortals" and "do not" rather than us and don't.

 

Don't normally do the grammar police thing but it does scan better that way.

[bubbsie1]

Hi JB

 

the letter is not intended to go out verbatim, it's just to demonstrate you can get all across all the points you need to without getting personal or making statements that you might not be able to prove are correct, you don't want to give her any cause for complaint against you.

 

When you draft your letter she will have to respond to the points you've raised.

 

So its just for you to use any of it you feel is relevant to your prolem; amend it as you need to.

 

Good luck

[joeblogs]

Thanks to all you kind people who have helped and assisted me with this letter. I will tweek away with it over the next couple of days, then re-post if you dont mind having another look at the revised version, I would be so greatful to you all.

 

Thanks again for giving me your time and expertise.

[2Grumpy]

There is a saying along the lines of practice making perfect ... obviously this woman hasn't heard that but is proof of it's message

[joeblogs]

Hi Everyone, hope you all had a good Easter, at least here, the weather has been great. As promised last Tuesday I have now had a chance to tweek my original letter and as follows is the revised version. If you would be kind enough to have a look at it and make any alteration suggestions if necessary. Many thanks to you all. As follows:-

 

Re: Alledged School Dinner Money Debt

Thank you for your letter dated 14 April 2011, your comments have been carefully noted. It would appear from the contents you are not in full possession of the facts relating to this matter, or your have chosen to ignore them.

 

I suggest before you respond to this letter you familiarise yourself with my previous correspondence.

 

As stated I spoke with the Acting Manager, Mr X, every week from the beginning of November until the nursery broke up for the Christmas holidays in December 2010. Again and again, I asked him to advise me if my daughter was entitled to free school meals.

 

Mr X always responded to me saying that he ‘would get back to me if M was not entitled to free school meals’ in order that I could make alternative arrangements if necessary.

 

Mr X failed to not come back to me during the four months my daughter ate at the school lunches, therefore I reasonably believed my daughter was entitled to the free lunches.

 

Had I been advised, as promised by your Acting Manager, that my daughter was not entitled to free meals I could have sent her with a packed lunch and all of this unpleasantness and the threat of legal action and costs would have been avoided.

 

Firstly let me say, I take the threat of legal action/costs very seriously and would

inform you that I have indeed sought legal advice with regards to your claims that you will be pursuing legal action regarding the disputed amount of £49.95.

In the circumstances I am surprised and disappointed that you either did not hear my account of the incident, or chose to ignore it, before you decided to threaten me with legal action, fixed costs, County Court costs' and 'statutory interest’.

As a non-practising solicitor you must be aware that as I have relied on the advice/judgment of your manager and in doing so I have acted to my detriment it is therefore, not my fault. I do not consider that I am responsible for this debt given your Acting Manager’s failure to communicate with me, this lack of communication has left me with a financial burden I can ill afford.

 

I am not a lawyer by any standards, however, I understand this principle is referred to as estoppel.

To clarify, estoppel is a bar or impediment preventing a party from asserting a fact or a claim inconsistent with a position that party previously took, either by conduct or words, especially where a representation has been relied or acted upon by others.

So if you are given advice/a promise that you have relied upon and in doing so you have acted to your detriment, the other party is estopped from denying that. Simplified, it is your fault as I relied on the advice of the Acting Manager to tell me that my daughter was not entitled to free school meals. Therefore, the onus remains with you to pay X Catering and not expect me to suffer financial hardship due to your error.

 

Furthermore my understanding of the role of a non-practising solicitor is that in order for you to give legal advice in the course of a business you must hold a practising certificate. As you are clearly providing legal advice in the course of a business, you should have a practicing certificate.

 

I have spoken with the Law society, and upon their advice, I have sent them copies of your correspondence claiming to be a "Non-Practicing Solicitor" and they are looking into the matter.

I hope that any future correspondence you send demonstrates that you are able to treat me with respect, and I believe that your use of the word 'solicitor' is a clear indication of your attempt to intimidate and threaten me as though I am unable to make a valid defence. I can assure you that I am most certainly not responsible for this debt and will vigorously defend any Court action by submitting a Counter Claim against the nursery.

I have spoken with X County Council and brought this matter to their attention. I will in due course be lodging an official complaint against the disgraceful attitude and the veiled threats contained in your correspondence. XCC stated that you have made ‘a very poor statement and not one expected to be voiced by a service provider’.

Furthermore, I intend to write to Ofsted sending them copies of your correspondence.

I understand by looking on their website, your nursery reference number XYZ, that the last inspection NURSERY underwent was in 2006. With the attitude you are displaying, I believe that an up to date inspection should be scheduled forthwith.

 

In addition, as suggested by X County Council, an apology would not go amiss!

Finally, upon the recommendation of X County Council, I want this correspondence recorded as an official complaint.

[bubbsie1]

Hi Everyone, hope you all had a good Easter, at least here, the weather has been great. As promised last Tuesday I have now had a chance to tweek my original letter and as follows is the revised version. If you would be kind enough to have a look at it and make any alteration suggestions if necessary. Many thanks to you all. As follows:-

 

Re: Alledged School Dinner Money Debt

 

Thank you for your letter dated 14 April 2011, your comments have been carefully noted. It would appear from the contents you are not in full possession of the facts relating to this matter, or your have chosen to ignore them.

 

I suggest before you respond to this letter you familiarise yourself with my previous correspondence.

 

As stated I spoke with the Acting Manager, Mr X, every week from the beginning of November until the nursery broke up for the Christmas holidays in December 2010. Again and again, I asked him to advise me if my daughter was entitled to free school meals.

 

Mr X always responded to me saying that he ‘would get back to me if M was not entitled to free school meals’ in order that I could make alternative arrangements if necessary.

 

Mr X failed to come back to me during the four months my daughter ate at the school ;;therefore I reasonably believed my daughter was entitled to free lunches.

 

Had I been advised, as promised by your Acting Manager, that my daughter was not entitled to free meals I could have sent her with a packed lunch and all of this unpleasantness and the threat of legal action and costs would have been avoided.

 

Firstly let me say, I take the threat of legal action/costs very seriously and would

inform you that I have indeed sought advice with regards to your claims that you may.be pursuing legal action.

 

I am surprised and disappointed that you did not choose to hear my account of the incident before you threatened me with legal action, fixed costs, County Court costs' and 'statutory interest’.

 

As a non-practising solicitor you must be aware that as I have relied on the advice/judgment of your manager and in doing so I have acted to my detriment it is therefore, not my fault. I do not consider that I am responsible for this debt given your Acting Manager’s failure to communicate with me, this lack of communication has left me with a financial burden I can ill afford.

 

 

I am not a lawyer by any standards, however, I understand this principle is referred to as estoppel.

 

 

So if you are given advice/a promise that you have relied upon and in doing so you have acted to your detriment, the other party is estopped from denying that. Simplified, it is your fault as I relied on the advice of the Acting Manager to tell me that my daughter was not entitled to free school meals.

 

Therefore, the onus remains with you to resolve this issue and not expect me to suffer any financial hardship due to your error.

 

Furthermore my understanding of the role of a non-practising solicitor is that in order for you to give legal advice in the course of a business you must hold an up to date practising certificate.

 

As you appear to be acting in the role of legal advisor to the nursery (which operates as a business) you should hold a current practicing certificate.

 

I have spoken with the Law society, and and at their request I have sent them copies of your correspondence.

 

I trust any future correspondence you send demonstrates that you are able to treat me with respect, and I believe that your use of the word 'solicitor' is a clear indication of your attempt to intimidate me as though I am unable to make a valid defence.

 

I can assure you that I am most certainly not responsible for this debt and will vigorously defend any Court action by submitting a Counter Claim against the nursery.

 

I have spoken with X County Council and brought this matter to their attention. I will in due course be lodging an official complaint against the disgraceful attitude and the veiled threats contained in your correspondence. XCC stated that you have made ‘a very poor statement and not one expected to be voiced by a service provider’.

 

Furthermore, I intend to write to Ofsted sending them copies of your correspondence.

I understand by looking on their website, your nursery reference number XYZ, that the last inspection NURSERY underwent was in 2006. With the attitude you are displaying, I believe that an up to date inspection should be scheduled forthwith.

 

 

In addition, as suggested by X County Council, an apology would not go amiss!

 

Finally, upon the recommendation of X County Council, I want this correspondence recorded as an official complaint.

 

yours faithfully

[bubbsie1]

Hi JB

 

I have tweaked your letter ever so sligthly; just used the words 'I believe' instead of 'clearly you are' also took out the extended definition of estoppel, she will know what it is and you have already given her a clear breakdown of the principles in your account of what went wrong.

 

A good letter JB it does get your point across very well.

 

I would still consider not letting her know about your dealings with the county council at this stage; is she does write and apologise and withdraw the request for payment then you've acheived the result you wanted.

 

If not then play your county council/ofsted card, it's entirely up to you.

 

I took out the costs comments and who should pay for the meals because I don't believe in supplying your daughter with a lucnh anyone has actually incurred any extra cost;after how much can a small child eat and no doubt there is food left over at the end of meals that would probaly be discarded, so your daughters meal would not be an extra expense.

 

good luck.

 

Bubbsie

[rameses_qc]

http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/documents/downloads/PC_nonsolicitor_org.pdf

[cerberusalert]

http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/documents/downloads/PC_nonsolicitor_org.pdf

 

That document applies to conduct issues occurring before 1 July 2007.

For rules governing conduct after 1 July 2007, see http://www.rules.sra.org.uk.

[rameses_qc]

Yes indeedy, and I'm grateful to you for making it clear. perhaps I should have clarified that the definition of who can and can't use the designation "solicitor" has remained the same in general termsThe notes to rule 12 http://www.sra.org.uk/rule12/ gives an in depth look at this subject

[joeblogs]

Thank you to all you kind people who have taken the time and trouble to respond to this thread, especially Bubbsie1.

 

I have made the adjustments you have suggested and decided to take out the comments about the County Council and Ofsted as you quite rightly state,

 

if I get them to withdraw and receive an apology, then job done.

If not, then I will use that card up my sleeve for the next round.

 

I will give them the letter this coming Thursday when my daughter next attends, she only goes 2.5 days a week, on the half day she attends, she always eats before going anyway, so we are only talking about 2 meals a week over a period of 4 months, and the fact that there have been Christmas, Easter and half terms holidays in between all this.

 

I will let you all know what response I receive, it will probably be in a couple of weeks time, given that we have even more Bank Hols this weekend. I will put the response on this thread. Again, thanks to you all, hope you all had a great Easter and Happy Bank Holiday this weekend.

[joeblogs]

Hi Everyone,

 

As promised in my previous thread, I have now received a response from the nursery on their letter headed paper (all previous letters were on their letterheads). It reads as follows:-

 

3rd May 2011

 

Dear Mrs G

 

Re: Your Letter of the 28th April 2011

 

Thank you for your letter of the 28th April 2011.

 

I am not in a position to respond to your comments in relatio to yur debt at this time as I wish to discuss this matter further with the owners of the Nursery and the Acting Manager.

 

However, I feel it necessary to respond to you in relation to your comments in respect of my position.

 

For the record my name appears on the Roll of Solicitors and as a result of this I am, under the Solicitors (Keeping on the Roll) Regulations 1999, allowed to use the title 'Non-Practicing Solicitor'.

 

In relation to your comments in respect of a Practicing Certificate, I am not acting as a legal advisor for the Nursery I am in fact their Business Manager, as my letter of the 14th April 2011 clearly stated. I merely deal with the running of the business, which includes credit control.

 

The Nursery's legal advice comes from firstly their insurance provider and secondly from an agreement with their Bank.

 

I am not working as a solicitor or a legal advisor of any description and I am certainly not holding myself out to be a solicitor. I do not, therefore, need a Practicing Certificate.

 

I trust that you will forward a copy of this letter to the body you have allegedly spoken to in this respect to clarify the position.

 

In the meantime, I would be grateful if you could please confirm whether you first raised the issue of free school meals with the Acting Manager or if it was, in fact, Mrs H who was our Officer in Charge until December 2010 as you have stated you raised the matter in early November 2010.

 

I await hearing from you.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Miss XYZ

Nursery Business Manager

Non-Practicing Solicitor

 

 

So that folks is the response. First of all, she mentions in paragraph 5 'I am not acting as a legal advisor to the Nursery I am in fact their Business Manager, as my letter of the 14th April 2011 clearly stated'. It also clearly stated 'Business Manager - Non Practicing Solicitor'.

 

Additionally, this letter also states her title as 'Business Manager - Non Practicing Solicitor'. So if you are not their Legal Advisor, why bother to put the title of Non Practicing Solicitor at the end of your letter? Why not just put the title you state to be i.e. 'Business Manager'?

 

Furthermore, she knows full well that I did not have any conversation with 'Mrs H the Officer in Charge until December 2010' due to the fact that Mrs H was off on long term sick leave from early October 2010 and never returned back to the Nursery and instead tendered her resignation (it was all quite strange actually, but thats not my problem!). This Non Practicing Solicitor knows full well that all my weekly conversations were with the Acting Manager, because that is what he was, the Acting Manager in the absence of Mrs H. She is trying to imply that Mrs H was working in the Nursery until December 2010, the last time Mrs H worked in the Nursery was around late September early October 2010, then she vanished on 'sick leave' then resigned.

 

Help anyone please with a suitable response!!!!

[Bazooka Boo]

Dear miss knickers in a twist.

 

Thank you for your lengthy explanation regarding your use of 'non practicing solicitor' I will gladly forward a copy of your letter to the authority who IS dealing with their investigation, for the avoidance of doubt, there is NO alleged body.

 

I was clearly confused by your previous correspondence as you had signed off with "Business Manager - Non Practicing Solicitor" I feel that if you are not their legal advisor then there is no requirement to mislead people in believing you are somehow acting in that capacity. (But if it makes you feel better, knock yourself out!)

 

I will remind you that Miss H was not working at the nursery in December, the last time she worked at the nursery was late September early October before going on sick leave, and then resigning. So in answer to your question, it was clearly the Acting Manager with whom I spoke with, on a weekly basis.

 

I look forward to your prompt response, with a mutually beneficial end to this protracted disagreement.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Qualified House wife,

Qualified holder of a car licence

Non-practicing holder of a cycling proficiency licence.

Non practicing 50mtr green swimming badge holder

[cerberusalert]

I would have thought there was a lot more money in soliciting than in her present position.

[Bazooka Boo]

Oh yes indeedy! Add that to the bottom of the letter!