Parking - Letter Before Action? Letter Before County Court Claim? Fight back!

zzzLazyDaisy

Are you saying that PE are issuing court papers without even a letter before action?

Even before the advent of the Practice Direction a Claimant's failure to serve a letter before action was grounds for the court to refuse to award costs against the losing party so I'd definitely raise that issue.

But yes, if that is what is happening, the Defence should make it clear that the Claimant did not serve a letter before action /letter before claim and did not follow any of the steps set out in the Practice Direction on Pre-action conduct.

I'd refer the court to Para 4 on non-compliance and sanction, and I'd also point out that there can be no reasonable excuse for the Claimant's failure to follow the Pre-action Conduct process, especially bearing in mind that the Claim was issued by (their own legal department? Solicitors?) so they clearly had legal advice before issuing proceedings.

I'd also point out that the Claimant did not invite the Defendant to agree to refer the matter to POPLA (the appropriate form of ADR for parking charge disputes) as directed by para 8 of the Practice Direction. Further the Defendent was denied the opportunity to consider settlement and/or how best to proceed in accordance with the ethos and spirit of the Practice Directions.

I haven't had any experience (yet) of this, but I think I would file a concise defence and ask the court to make an order that the Claimant comply with the Practice Direction on Pre-action Conduct as a condition of continuing with the action.

EDIT - thinking further about this - I'd ask the court to stay the proceedings for (say) 30 days to enable the parties to comply with the Practice Direction with a view to considering the possibility of settlement and/or how best to proceed.

If that application was granted I would skip the acknowledgement step and go straight to the Response stage and really hit them with requests for information and documentation.

If court did not grant the application then I would go the old route and serve them with a request for further and better particulars (basically the list of questions you would normally ask and the associated documents you want them to provide).

BUT - the first very first thing I would do is check and double check that the RT/Driver didn't just ignore earlier correspondence, or move house and neglect to inform DVLA, because the obligation to comply with the Practice Direction swings both ways.

nigelbb

We are definitely seeing people who have not had a LBA from ParkingEye. They may have had a letter from a debt collector threatening legal action but never had a formal LBA.

We think that PE are evaluating a number of schemes to discover the best way of squeezing money from their victims rather as a proper company would run and monitor a marketing campaign. Some people are getting LBAs & some are not. If PE find that sending a LBA gets just as many to cough up as actually filing a claim then that is what they will do for the future.

It seems inconceivable that PE seriously want to follow through with well defended claims in court not least because their whole business is on very shaky ground trying to pursue these claims. If someone with deep pockets & a bee in the bonnet were to defend and appeal claims then PE are seriously at risk of having the whole PPC pack of cards come tumbling around their ears. Even just a few well publicised losses could seriously damage their business. They run a protection racket based on fear & intimidation & once the courts cannot be held as a threat over people then just like any other bully once their victims stop fearing them then the game is up.

nigelbb

I have just been reading the rules on PRACTICE DIRECTION – PRE-ACTION CONDUCT http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/pd_pre-action_conduct

Wow! ParkingEye have seriously abused the process & there are just so many ways that they can be hammered over not following the process. This is just for starters:-

Examples of non-compliance
4.4
The court may decide that there has been a failure of compliance by a party because, for example, that party has –
(1) not provided sufficient information to enable the other party to understand the issues;
(2) not acted within a time limit set out in a relevant pre-action protocol, or, where no specific time limit applies, within a reasonable period;
(3) unreasonably refused to consider ADR (paragraph 8 in Part III of this Practice Direction and the pre-action protocols all contain similar provisions about ADR); or
(4) without good reason, not disclosed documents requested to be disclosed.

It looks like anyone taken to court by PE or receiving a LBA who has ignored all correspondence just needs to propose that allowing POPLA to consider the case as ADR should be able to get the court action stopped in its tracks.

8. Alternative Dispute Resolution
8.1
Starting proceedings should usually be a step of last resort, and proceedings should not normally be started when a settlement is still actively being explored. Although ADR is not compulsory, the parties should consider whether some form of ADR procedure might enable them to settle the matter without starting proceedings. The court may require evidence that the parties considered some form of ADR (see paragraph 4.4(3)).

zzzLazyDaisy

nigelbb wrote: »

I have just been reading the rules on PRACTICE DIRECTION – PRE-ACTION CONDUCT http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/pd_pre-action_conduct
It looks like anyone taken to court by PE or receiving a LBA who has ignored all correspondence just needs to propose that allowing POPLA to consider the case as ADR should be able to get the court action stopped in its tracks.

Yep the Practice Direction is a major string to our bow - but it shouldn't lead us into being complacent - an Acknowledgment should raise all the issues where the LBA is defective (ie not just rely on the ADR point) and importantly the Acknowledgment MUST expressly refer to the Practice Direction. Merely asking nicely for a POPLA code after ignoring previous correspondence, isn't going to cut it!

Dave_TH

what a brilliantly stonking post, thank you, Pepipoo hall of fame T shirt ordered.

bazster

Yeah, this is fantastic stuff. Thanks so much Daisy.

peter_the_piper

Bump, don't want to lose this. Sticky anyone?

bazster

Bumpity-bump. Sticky please!!!

outlook2013

Hi all, new member here but been on pepipoo for a while now.

I had a PE LBA recently. I replied asking for a list of documents and whatnot so I could response fully (wasn't aware of PD at this stage, naturally their LBA didn't mention it!)

They replied today with a generic copy and paste FAQ that has absolutely nothing to do with anything whatsoever in my letter.

I've drafted up another letter, based on the PD and the other advice in this thread. Should I post it here for checking? (Identifying details removed, obviously)

Umkomaas

outlook2013 wrote: »

Hi all, new member here but been on pepipoo for a while now.

I had a PE LBA recently. I replied asking for a list of documents and whatnot so I could response fully (wasn't aware of PD at this stage, naturally their LBA didn't mention it!)

They replied today with a generic copy and paste FAQ that has absolutely nothing to do with anything whatsoever in my letter.

I've drafted up another letter, based on the PD and the other advice in this thread. Should I post it here for checking? (Identifying details removed, obviously)

Please don't hijack such an important thread. Please start your own new one and help will be on its way.