Reply to PE's LBA (and subsequent FAQ letter).

born_3

I received a "Standard" LBA from PE, sent them a response for some information and received a list of FAQS as per {I'm not allowed to post a link}.

This is the response I've drafted:

"
P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm; } Dear Sir/Madam

Parking Charge Notice Reference xxxxxxx& Letter xxxx
Vehicle Regiostration: xxxxx

I refer to your “Letter Before Action” (dated xxxxxx and hereafter referred to as a “Letter before Calim” or “LBC”) and dispute the claimant's parking charge, which I consider to be unfair, exorbitant and punitive and as such contrary to common law and statute, including (but not exclusively) Section 5 of The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.


This letter is the Registered Keeper of the vehicle with the registration no. xxxxxxx's formal letter of Acknowledgment of the Claimant's Letter Before Claim dated 06/07/13 as required by the Practice Direction on Pre-action Conduct.

As the Registered Keeper of xxxxxxxx I wish to point out that the Claimant’s LBC does not comply with the Practice Direction on Pre-action Conduct so as the Registered Keeper I am unable to comply with the Practice Direction until the Claimant has provided the further information requested in this letter.


Firstly I wish to repeat an ammended praragraph from my first response (dated xxxxxxxxx) to the Claimants LBC (xxxxxxx):

“...It is necessary for the parties in any dispute to exhaust all other options before resorting to court proceedings. I /B][B]demand[/B][B that you issue me with a POPLA verification code to enable me to refer this matter for independent adjudication. I understand that you do not recognise the 35 day rule stipulated in the British Parking Association Code of Practice and this request should not cause any procedural problems for your company...”


I wish to remind the Claimant of its obligation under para 8 of the Practice Direction to consider an ‘appropriate form of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)’ and invite the Claimant to issue a POPLA Verification Code since that is the appropriate form of ADR set up to deal with parking charge disputes.


As the Registered Keeper I also require a detailed breakdown of the Claimant’s pre-estimate of loss as without this information it is impossible for the me as the Regestired Keeper to provide a Response to the Letter Before Claim.


I also require the Claimant to provide a list in the Letter Before Claim of all the documents the Claimant is going to rely on in court. That list was not present in the LBC and I demand that the Claimant send it to me, the Registered Keeper, and I am unable to comply with the Practice Direction until the Claimant sends me this information.


I also request you to provide me with the following information so that I can prepare and provide a full response to the Claimant's LBC:

1. The full name and address details of the party contracting with the Claimant for the provision of car park management services.

2. The full name and address details of the land owner, if different from 1.

3. An itemised breakdown of any losses the Claimant have incurred as a result of this parking event.

4. An itemised breakdown of any losses the party contracting with the Claimant and (if different) the landowner have incurred as a result of this parking event.

5. An explanation as to how the requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 making the keeper liable have been satisfied. I consider the Claimant's Parking Charge Notice to be invalid on the grounds that it does not identify the creditor, contrary to paragraph 9 (2) (h) of Schedule 4.


If the Claimant is not the landowner, please explain ParkingEye's standing to act as Claimant in bringing these proceedings and provide a copy of the contract between the Claimant and the Landowner authorising it do so.


I also inform the Claimant that I require a reply within 14 days and cam confirm that the as the Registered Keeper I will provide a full written Response as required within 30 days of receiving the information requested in this letter.

Alternatively, you may wish to bring this matter to a close by canceling the Parking Charge Notice. If, however, you choose to pursue it further then please be assured I will defend my position robustly.

Yours faithfully


"

zzzLazyDaisy

Hi Born 3 this is a good first shot at an acknowledgment, well done.

You have (understandably) got a little confused about what to include. This isn't an appeal or a defence. It isn't the right time to say why you are not liable, or why their claim is wrong. That comes later.

All you need to do in your acknowledgement is to explain to them what is wrong with their letter before claim, and what they must do to put it right so that you can deal with the next stage of the pre-action conduct (which is your Response).

So with that in mind I would take out the bit in the first para about disputing the charge down to 1999.

So after the first bit ending in ('LBC') you can then carry straight in with 'This is the Registered Keeper's formal Acknowledgment etc etc (you have already quoted the registration number at the top so you don't need to state it again here).

I would also add, immediately after where you say you are unable to comply with the PD until the Claimant has provided the additional information

"I take this opportunity to remind the Claimant of its obligations under the Practice Direction and to draw its attention to para 4 concerning the court’s powers to impose sanctions for failure to comply with the Practice Direction, and ask you to note that I will show this letter to the court if the Claimant starts proceedings without first properly completing all stages of the Pre-action Conduct." (remove the speech marks)


Carrying on: I would also take out the reference to your 'first response'

The next two paragraphs pretty much repeat the same thing - you are inviting them to exhaust all options before starting court proceedings and so you are inviting them to issue you with a POPLA code as required by para 8 of the practice direction. So you need to join those two paras together and tidy them up.

The rest is fine.

Have a look at the suggestions for posting etc here https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4705657

Then come back when you get a reply (don't be surprised if they still don't comply with the Practice Direction - the object here is just to keep at them until they realise that you are not going to roll over)

Dx

Coupon-mad

[demand] and 'calim' = not sure it should be 'demand' a POPLA code and 'calim' is a typo of course.

Nice acknowledgement IMHO! :T

zzzLazyDaisy

Coupon-mad wrote: »

[demand] and 'calim' = not sure it should be 'demand' a POPLA code and 'calim' is a typo of course.

Nice acknowledgement IMHO! :T

Yes, it should be 'invite the Claimant to issue a POPLA code' (or some other nice polite phrase).

Always remember these letters may end up being examined by a judge - keep the moral high ground :-)

born_3

Just re-looked at my two PE LBAs: they both claim the date of the "parking event" and the date "...we made you aware, as the registered keeper of this vehicle, you had become liable..." are both in excess of 35 days - is this something?

Both are 38 days.

The_Slithy_Tove

born_3 wrote: »

Just re-looked at my two PE LBAs: they both claim the date of the "parking event" and the date "...we made you aware, as the registered keeper of this vehicle, you had become liable..." are both in excess of 35 days - is this something?

Both are 38 days.

They are part of a defence, i.e. non-conformance to BPA CoP. As already indicated, they do not make up part of your acknowledgement to the LBC. All you are doing here is asking for certain information that they are obliged to provide. See post #2.

born_3

The_Slithy_Tove wrote: »

They are part of a defence, i.e. non-conformance to BPA CoP. As already indicated, they do not make up part of your acknowledgement to the LBC. All you are doing here is asking for certain information that they are obliged to provide. See post #2.

No, no I've sent the letters off (signed for on Saturday) - and thanks for all the guidance in drafting it - that was just something I noticed when putting all of their threats (my receipts and letter copies) into a file.

Coupon-mad

born_3 wrote: »

Just re-looked at my two PE LBAs: they both claim the date of the "parking event" and the date "...we made you aware, as the registered keeper of this vehicle, you had become liable..." are both in excess of 35 days - is this something?

Both are 38 days.

Nope. Their 'making you aware' letter was the second letter. You should have kept the Notices to Keeper then you would know the dates (we never said throw letters away, in fact we always said keep them even when ignoring).

So I see you have sent the acknowledgements off now, so move on to drafting the response as per zzzLazyDaisy's advice on the other thread about LBAs.