On Monday 9 November 2026 a company director forwarded us an email he had received that morning. It was headed “Formal Notice regarding Potential Business Name Rights”, came from rforster@ip.rl-law.co.uk and was signed “Ruth Forster, Registered IP Solicitor”. It told him someone was preparing to apply to register his own company name as a UK trademark, and gave him three days to explain his position. He asked us a simple question: should he treat it as suspicious?
We checked every detail in the email against the official registers. Here is what we found.
What did the notice say?
The email said it came from “the Trademark Division of RL LAW LTD”. It described a proposed UK trademark application for his company name that was “currently subject to our internal pre-filing checks and verification procedures”, cited the Trade Marks Act 1994, “including Sections 5, 5(4)(a) and 38”, and the Trade Marks Rules 2008, and asked him to confirm within three days whether he had traded under the name or claimed any interest in it. If he didn’t reply, “our review may be completed using the information available to us at that time”.
The signature gave an address in Wargrave, near Reading, a phone number, the website rl-law.co.uk and “SRA: 8016210”. The full email is at the end of this page.
Why does it look so convincing?
Because most of the details are real, and that’s worth saying first.
- RL Law Ltd is a real law firm. The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) register lists RL LAW LTD as an SRA-regulated firm, a licensed body since 17 August 2026, authorised for all legal services.
- 8016210 is that firm’s real SRA number.
- The address is right. 41a High Street, Wargrave, Reading, RG10 8BU is the head office and registered office the SRA publishes for the firm.
- The phone number fits. +44 118 464 0415 is a 0118 number, the Reading code that covers Wargrave.
- Ruth Forster is a real solicitor. There is an SRA-regulated solicitor of that name, admitted in 2001.
Whoever wrote this used accurate public details. That’s what makes it convincing, and it’s the same pattern we described in our Fenrick & Stone warning.
What do the registers show?
The SRA register, firm record (read 12 November 2026). RL LAW LTD, SRA number 8016210, company registration 17129795, head office 41a High Street, Wargrave. The firm hasn’t given the SRA a website, phone number or email address, so the SRA’s records don’t link it to rl-law.co.uk or to the phone number in the email. The register lists two SRA-regulated people and roles at the firm: a solicitor who is its compliance officer for legal practice, and a compliance officer for finance and administration who is not a lawyer. Ruth Forster is not one of them.
The SRA register, Ruth Forster’s own record. She is an SRA-regulated solicitor, admitted on 3 September 2001, with a practising certificate from 1 November 2026. Her own SRA number is 194422, not 8016210. Under “Where this person works”, the register says: “There are currently no practices displayed for this person.” That neither confirms nor rules out a connection with any firm, and we don’t suggest either.
Companies House. RL LAW LTD was incorporated on 31 March 2026, with its registered office at 41 High Street, Wargrave. Ruth Forster is not, and has never been, one of its officers.
The domain. rl-law.co.uk was registered on 5 November 2026 at 20:14, four days before the email was sent. On 12 November Nominet still showed it in its “add period”, the first days after registration. It is registered through Namecheap (trading as Spaceship) and runs on shared hosting. The registrant’s details are withheld, which is common and tells us nothing on its own.
The email address. The website gives info@rl-law.co.uk as its contact. The notice came from a different address, on the subdomain ip.rl-law.co.uk, which appears nowhere on the site. That subdomain receives its email through a different provider (Hostinger) from the main domain.
The website. The site calls itself “RLL” and “an independent trademark service”. It sells trademark registration, clearance searches and monitoring, each from £199. It doesn’t name the company behind it, give a company number or an SRA number, say it is a law firm or name anyone who works there. Its terms and privacy policy name “RLL” as the business and were “last updated November 2026”. Its photos are credited to free picture libraries. The site’s own page code names rll.co.uk as its main address. That domain was registered in 2013, is held through a different registrar and currently redirects to a page offering it for sale.
The UK trademark register. There is no application or registration for the recipient’s company name on the UK register. An application that hasn’t been filed yet wouldn’t appear, so this proves nothing either way, but nothing on the register backs up the urgency of the notice.
What doesn’t add up?
- The notice is signed by Ruth Forster. The SRA lists two regulated people and roles at RL Law Ltd, and she is not one of them.
- The notice puts “SRA: 8016210” under her name. That is the firm’s number. Her own number is 194422.
- The firm was incorporated in March 2026 and authorised by the SRA in August 2026. The website in its name was registered on 5 November 2026, four days before the notice.
- SRA-regulated firms are required to show their regulated status on their websites. rl-law.co.uk doesn’t mention the SRA, RL Law Ltd or any company number, and the firm hasn’t given the SRA any website at all.
- The notice describes a “Trademark Division of RL LAW LTD”. The website describes “RLL”, an independent trademark service.
- The notice came from ip.rl-law.co.uk, a subdomain that appears nowhere on the website and uses a different email provider.
- The website’s own code points to rll.co.uk, a domain registered in 2013 that redirects to a page offering it for sale.
- “Registered IP Solicitor” is not a title the SRA uses.
These facts are as consistent with someone using a new law firm’s public details as with the firm sending the email. The firm is the right people to answer that, which is why we are writing to it (below).
Have we seen this before?
Yes. RL Law Ltd is the sixth SRA-regulated law firm whose name we’ve seen used this way since September, and five of the six had been authorised by the SRA in the previous seven months, some only weeks before.
| Firm named | Authorised by the SRA | Website registered | Notice sent |
|---|---|---|---|
| RSK Legal | July 2026 | 8 September 2026 | 21 September 2026 |
| Fenrick & Stone | March 2026 | 16 September 2026 | 7 and 12 October 2026 |
| Hear Law | October 2026 | 13 October 2026 | 14 October 2026 |
| Applegate Legal Services | September 2026 | 19 October 2026 | 20 October 2026 |
| Jones Hedley | 2017 | 26 October 2026 | 27 October 2026 |
| RL Law | August 2026 | 5 November 2026 | 9 November 2026 |
The wording is the same each time: the subject line, the “Trademark Division”, the same four legal references, a deadline of a few days, the “Registered IP Solicitor” title, and a subdomain that appears nowhere on the website. In the Fenrick & Stone case, the real firm publicly confirmed the website and email addresses were not its own.
The set-up behind this website matches too:
- The same server. rl-law.co.uk sits on the same server address as both Jones Hedley websites we checked in October.
- The same email hosting. The website’s own email runs on the same shared hosting as the Jones Hedley and Applegate Legal Services websites.
- The same sending trick. The email came from an “ip.” subdomain with a different mail provider, Hostinger, the same arrangement as the “ip.” and “notice.” subdomains in the earlier cases.
- The same prices. Three packages at £199, £299 and £449, for registration, clearance searches and monitoring alike.
The one difference is where the domain was bought: rl-law.co.uk was registered through Namecheap’s Spaceship, where the Jones Hedley, Applegate and Hear Law websites used Dynadot. Shared hosting puts many unrelated websites on one server, so none of this proves a connection on its own, but alongside everything else it fits the pattern.
What does the notice get wrong about the law?
- There is no “pre-filing verification” process at the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO). Nothing requires an applicant, or their representative, to write to earlier users before filing.
- Section 38 of the Trade Marks Act 1994 deals with publishing an application and opposing it. It says nothing about checks before filing.
- Sections 5 and 5(4)(a) are grounds an earlier rights holder can raise against an application after it is published, in opposition, or later in an invalidity action. They are not a checklist the applicant’s own adviser clears in advance.
- Section 5(4)(a) protects the recipient. It is the provision that lets an earlier unregistered user of a name oppose a later application on passing-off grounds. The notice cites the very section that would protect him.
- The three-day deadline comes from nothing in the Act or the Rules.
Have we contacted the firm?
We are emailing RL Law Ltd to let it know, in case it isn’t already aware, to share what we found and to offer the email for any report it wants to make to the SRA. We’ll publish any response in full.
What does this mean for a new law firm?
Spare a thought for the firms whose names end up in these emails.
Becoming a solicitor takes years: a degree, the Solicitors Qualifying Examination or the older Legal Practice Course, and two years of qualifying work experience or a training contract. Most then spend years more in practice, building experience at someone else’s firm, before they take the step of opening their own. That step is a big one. The SRA has to approve the firm and the people running it, the firm needs compliance officers and professional indemnity insurance in place, and the application is examined before the firm can open for business.
RL Law Ltd’s company was set up on 31 March 2026, and the SRA authorised the firm on 17 August, four and a half months later. Less than twelve weeks after that, a website using its name was registered, and four days later an email quoting its SRA number was giving a business three days to defend its own name.
A new firm’s name, SRA number and address are public from the day it’s authorised, and a domain in its name can be registered in minutes. If someone else is using those details, the firm’s reputation is put at risk before it has had the chance to build one, and it may not hear about it until a business like our client’s picks up the phone to ask. Five of the six firms in the table above were in exactly that position.
Being newly authorised isn’t a warning sign. It’s what makes these firms a target. Nothing we have found suggests RL Law Ltd has done anything wrong, and we’d ask anyone who receives one of these emails to keep that in mind.
That’s also where a registered trademark earns its keep. A firm with a registered trademark has a document it can hand straight to Nominet or a hosting provider. Without one, it has to prove its rights in the name from its trading history, which a firm a few months old has very little of. Our trademark monitoring watches for new domains and social accounts using your name, not just new trademark applications.
Is AI making these harder to spot?
Yes. A polished website is now an afternoon’s work, so how a site looks tells you nothing. What still gives these away is the detail behind it: a website days old, a signature that doesn’t match the regulator’s list, a number that belongs to someone else, and a deadline nobody can explain.
What to look out for
- A “notice” about your own name that you weren’t expecting, from a firm you haven’t dealt with.
- A deadline measured in hours or days.
- A competing applicant who is never named.
- References to “pre-filing checks” or “verification” with the UKIPO. There’s no such stage.
- A solicitor’s name that doesn’t appear on the firm’s own SRA record.
- An SRA number that, when you check it, belongs to someone or something else.
- A website with no company number or SRA status on it, or one registered in the last few weeks.
Why are you being targeted?
We don’t know exactly how the senders of these letters choose who to write to. From the ones forwarded to us, they tend to pick businesses that:
- are established and have been trading for a while
- have a strong name, logo or tagline that customers know them by
- have not registered a trademark
They know you should have one. They are counting on a moment of panic, when paying them feels quicker than finding a legitimate adviser. The people who have told us they paid after a letter like this rarely received anything for their money.
How did the letter make you feel?
If it worried you, take that seriously. However badly meant, the letter has put its finger on something real: your brand may not be protected, and a registered trademark is the best way to protect it.
Ask yourself what it would cost if you had to stop using your name tomorrow and rebrand: the signage, the website, the packaging, the stationery, and the years of reputation built under that name.
Can you register your name?
Not always, which is why we check first. A trademark is not guaranteed. Your name has to be distinctive enough in your sector, and however long you have been trading, someone else may already own a trademark for it without you having felt the consequences yet.
That is why we always start with a free trademark search, followed by a Trademark Clearance Audit and consultation, so we can assess everything and flag any threats before you spend anything on official fees.
Trademarks are not just for big companies
They are not expensive: the UKIPO’s own fee for a UK trademark starts at £205 for ten years of protection, for one class, applied for online. And they are not a cost. A registered trademark is a business asset in its own right. For more detailed pricing, try our trademark cost calculator.
The key is keeping a regular watch on the trademark registers, Companies House, social media, marketplaces and even search engines. The real law firms named in some of these warnings have had strangers trading on the reputation and goodwill they built. The sooner you spot an infringement, the sooner you can have it taken down, and the less damage it can do to your brand. That is what TMH Monitoring does.
Find out where your name stands
We don’t condone the senders of these letters or their tactics, but we know who they pick: established businesses that haven’t registered a trademark. Trademarks are often overlooked by UK brands, yet a registration is the essential tool for getting malicious websites and confusingly similar social media accounts taken down.
We have just seen it work. A copycat law firm website we warned about was taken offline less than a day after we listed it. That is the value of proactive brand protection.
Start with a free search of the UK trademark register. It shows whether similar names are already registered, and a specialist will talk you through what it means for your business.
What to do if you have been contacted
- Don’t pay, and don’t reply to a deadline. Check first.
- Check the firm and the person yourself on the SRA register, and contact the firm only through the details the SRA publishes, not the ones in the email.
- Send it to us. Call 0161 833 5400 or forward it to enquiries@thetrademarkhelpline.com, and we will tell you what the registers show. No charge, no obligation.
- Report it. The IPO publishes guidance on misleading trademark payment requests and collects these at misleadinginvoices@ipo.gov.uk. If money has changed hands, contact Report Fraud (formerly Action Fraud) on 0300 123 2040. If a law firm’s or solicitor’s name has been used, tell the SRA.
- Want a trademark registered? Check the name first with our free trademark search, then see how UK trademark registration works. Use a representative you can find on the UK trademark register and, for a law firm, on the SRA register.
- Stop the letters arriving. Our Care of Address service puts our address on your trademark record instead of yours.
Our trademark scams directory and guide on how to spot trademark scams cover the other tricks doing the rounds.
The email in full
Reproduced as it arrived. The recipient’s name and company name are redacted; everything else is exactly as sent.
From: rforster@ip.rl-law.co.uk
Sent: Monday 9 November 2026, 11:35
To: [RECIPIENT REDACTED]
Subject: Formal Notice regarding Potential Business Name RightsDear [RECIPIENT’S COMPANY NAME],
This notice is being issued by the Trademark Division of RL LAW LTD concerning a proposed UK trade mark application for “[RECIPIENT’S COMPANY NAME]” The matter is currently subject to our internal pre-filing checks and verification procedures and has not yet been formally submitted to the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO).
Before completing these checks, we are seeking to establish whether any existing rights or competing commercial interests may be relevant to the proposed application. In conducting these preliminary enquiries, we have regard to the Trade Marks Act 1994, including Sections 5, 5(4)(a) and 38 where applicable, together with the Trade Marks Rules 2008.
Information identified during our enquiries suggests that you or your organisation may have used the name “[RECIPIENT’S COMPANY NAME]” in connection with commercial activities. We are contacting you to give you an opportunity to confirm your position before our internal review is completed.
Our enquiries are intended to establish whether there may be:
Earlier use of the name in the course of trade that could support a claim under Section 5(4)(a) of the Trade Marks Act 1994; or
Other earlier interests that may be relevant under Section 5, including unregistered trade mark rights, goodwill, trading names or related commercial interests.Please provide your written response within three (3) days of receiving this notice, confirming whether:
You or your organisation have previously traded, or continue to trade, in the United Kingdom under the name “[RECIPIENT’S COMPANY NAME]”; and/or
You claim any legal, commercial, equitable or other protectable interest in the name.If you believe the proposed application may affect rights or interests belonging to you, you are welcome to explain your position in writing and provide any relevant supporting documents or evidence for consideration during our verification process.
Please be aware of the following:
This correspondence is part of an internal pre-filing review. Its purpose is to allow any apparent earlier user to provide relevant information before the proposed application progresses.
If we do not receive a response within the three-day period, our review may be completed using the information available to us at that time.
If our enquiries do not identify any competing rights or relevant concerns, the proposed application may proceed in accordance with the applicant’s instructions.
If a formal application is subsequently filed, any dispute concerning earlier rights may need to be dealt with through the relevant procedures under the Trade Marks Act 1994 and the applicable UKIPO process.The UK trade mark system generally gives importance to the filing date of an application, subject to applicable earlier rights and other relevant legal provisions. If you are trading under this name and believe you have acquired rights through prior use, we invite you to make your position known within the period stated above so that the information can be considered before our internal review is concluded.
For record-keeping and audit purposes, we request that all correspondence concerning this matter be provided in writing.
As the matter remains at the verification stage, we would appreciate receiving your response within three (3) days of receipt so that our review can be completed before any further steps are taken in relation to the proposed application.
Yours faithfully,
RLL
Ruth Forster
Registered IP Solicitor
Phone: +44 118 464 0415
Address: 41a High Street, Wargrave, Reading, RG10 8BU, England
SRA: 8016210
Website: https://rl-law.co.uk/index.html
Have you had one of these?
If you’ve received a notice like this, from RL Law or any other name, forward it to enquiries@thetrademarkhelpline.com. Every one we see helps us warn other businesses, and helps the firms whose names are being used work out what is going on. We’ll check yours free.
Questions about this
Is RL Law Ltd a real law firm?
Yes. The SRA register lists RL LAW LTD as a regulated firm, licensed since 17 August 2026, SRA number 8016210. What doesn’t match is the person who signed the email, the age of the website and the email address it came from.
Answered by Jonathan Paton, Founder & CEOIs the email from RL Law Ltd?
The registers can’t answer that. Ruth Forster isn’t listed at the firm, the website was registered four days before the email and doesn’t mention the firm, and the email came from an address that isn’t on the site. We are asking the firm and will publish any reply.
Answered by Jonathan Paton, Founder & CEOIs someone really about to register my name?
Nothing on the UK register shows an application for the name in this email. If someone does file one, you can oppose it once it’s published, and earlier use of your name is one of the grounds.
Answered by Jonathan Paton, Founder & CEOShould I reply to say I’ve been trading under the name?
No. Check the firm and the person on the SRA register first, and contact the firm only through the details the SRA publishes. Or send it to us and we’ll check it free.
Answered by Jonathan Paton, Founder & CEO
