Letter before claim GPB Solicitors

Gardener48_2

Hi,

Very long running saga. Two 'fines dating back to Jan 2012 and Jan 13.
I have ignored everything so far from Rowborough, Graham White etc. The usual clowns sending me hopelessly inaccurate, badly worded letters and demands.
Last week though I received a Letter before claim from GPB Solicitors stating that their client WILL pursue this in court.
The usual 'respond within two weeks' etc.
I intend to ignore this one as well as I expect that it is yet another hollow threat but this one is worded differently and has me a little worried.
Is there any experience out there of GPB? Are they likely to take this further? Should I be worried?
Many thanks in anticipation.

kirkbyinfurnesslad_2

Which Parking company was it?

Gardener48_2

PCN (NW) Ltd.

zzzLazyDaisy

It is worth checking that the letter before claim does in fact comply with the Practice Direction regarding the information that must be contained in an LBC (see below).

Personally I would never ignore a letter before claim, as the next step is legal proceedings. On the other hand the LBC is the first step in those legal proceedings so it is reasonable to expect the solicitor to have got the letter before claim right....

Here is the full text of The Practice Direction on Pre-action Conduct, Annex A Para 2:

2. Claimant’s letter before claim
2.1
The claimant’s letter should give concise details about the matter. This should enable the defendant to understand and investigate the issues without needing to request further information. The letter should include –
(1) the claimant’s full name and address;
(2) the basis on which the claim is made (i.e. why the claimant says the defendant is liable); (eg, breach of contract? Trespass? Debt action for money due under a contractual invoice?)
(3) a clear summary of the facts on which the claim is based;
(4) what the claimant wants from the defendant;
(5) if financial loss is claimed, an explanation of how the amount has been calculated (eg a breakdown of the genuine pre-estimate of loss showing how it has been calculated (if breach of contract) or if some other claim, how the loss has been calculated)
and
(6) details of any funding arrangement (within the meaning of rule 43.2(1)(k) of the CPR) that has been entered into by the claimant (this is about insurance cover and probably doesn't apply)
2.2
The letter should also –
(1) list the essential documents on which the claimant intends to rely;
(2) set out the form of ADR (if any) that the claimant considers the most suitable and invite the defendant to agree to this; (eg what a bout a POPLA code?)
(3) state the date by which the claimant considers it reasonable for a full response to be provided by the defendant; and
(4) identify and ask for copies of any relevant documents not in the claimant's possession and which the claimant wishes to see.
2.3
Unless the defendant is known to be legally represented the letter should –
(1) refer the defendant to this Practice Direction and in particular draw attention to paragraph 4 concerning the court's powers to impose sanctions for failure to comply with the Practice Direction; and
(2) inform the defendant that ignoring the letter before claim may lead to the claimant starting proceedings and may increase the defendant's liability for costs.

Gardener48_2

Thank you LazyDaisy.

The letter lists almost nothing which you have outlined.

It does however mention my name, address etc. Then goes on to state the points which you listed in 2.3.

The main thing though is that all through this chain of letters, the various parties have got the dates wrong, they have varied.

Finally, the dates of the alleged 'offences' in the LETTER BEFORE CLAIM do not correspond with the dates on the original parking tickets (which I still have.)

Thanks.

Guys_Dad

If they use the dates in the letter before claim rather than the actual dates, let it go ahead.

Then produce the actual ticket in court and deny being in the park on the date contained in the court papers. Then claim costs

zzzLazyDaisy

I wouldn't produce the PCN - it is irrelevant as it does not prove you were not there on the day they claim.

Anyway, it is for the PPC to produce evidence that you were there, not the other way round.

For the moment I would keep schtum about the actual dates (it will just tip them off to go and check their records)

Does the LBC actually direct you to the Practice Direction? That's a new one!

First read this thread, as it tells you about the PD, what it means, and what you (and they) are required to do. (but ignore the stuff about nasty aggressive letters as that is a different PPC).

When you have read post 1 (please don't skip it as you are in a court process and you need to understand the procedure) I suggest that you go to post 45 and send them a 'soft reply' pointing out that their letter before claim does not comply with the Practice Direction requirements and ask them to send you the information set out at Annex A (which I have already copied for you in the post above), so that you can obtain advice on the matter.

Come back when you get an answer.

You must reply to the LBC within 14 days. As you got the letter last week the clock is ticking.

Dx

Guys_Dad

I agree about keeping quiet at present.

Producing conflicting dates at the right time is helpful as Daisy says, you presumably can show you were not there at the date in the court papers.

Stroma

I can't see this being any different from the graham white garbage, this is probably just another template letter to ignore. It's roxburghe after all ! And this parking company are not on the list of ones who have issued claims since pofa 2012.

Finally how can they make a claim when they are not acting for the landowner, or the parking company by the looks of things, but the debt collectors chasing an alleged debt?

Gardener48_2

Thanks Stroma. My instinct is to ignore this letter. Can a company actually take a case to court after issuing so many final demands and then offering a discount if you pay up?
It's as though they are making it up as they are going along.
The history of this is so messed up, I fancy my chances even if it does go to court, which I don't believe it will.

zzzLazyDaisy

Is the letter headed 'letter before claim' or ' letter before action'? and does it refer you to the Practice Direction on Pre-action Conduct?