PCN (NW) LTD taking me to court

oldfazer

Hi vickykelly

not trying to hijack but I'm in the same boat and recieved the same notification today. Here's my case

forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4787128&highlight=oldfazer

da_rule

kirkbyinfurnesslad wrote: »

You are under no duty to go to mediation.
Da rule is wrong on the issue of cosrs with regards to mediation.
Whats the point on mediating when you owe nothing. Ut has no bearing on your case

My point is not regards to the costs of mediation. It is that under Civil Procedure Rule 44.2(4)(a) the court can, in deciding on how to award costs after the hearing give bearing to the conduct of the parties involved. Civil Procedure Rule (CPR) 44.2(5)(a) sets out that this conduct can be before as well as during proceedings. If someone appears to be inflexible and unwilling to negotiate at the least, and thus keep the matter out of the court, the court can look at the conduct of the parties in the mediation and rule that they have not conducted themselves in a fitting manner. This part of the CPR also sets out that reference will be made to the pre-action protocols, whilst there is no specific pre-action protocol for these types of matters the Pre-Action Conduct Practice Direction will apply. Section 1 of this Practice Direction sets out that parties should give consideration to the use of ADR. Refusing to at least attempt to negotiate may also be seen as a breach of the CPR overriding objective, namely 1.1(2)(a)&(e) as it shows the parties are trying to save time and expense.

Stroma

What is the common ground here though? There is nothing owing as far as the OP is concerned, the parking company is not likely to settle on anything less than the full amount.

The OP is likely to be to strong armed into something that they don't want to do, as in a settlement figure that is well into 3 figures. So with that I suggest to sticking to their guns.

da_rule

Stroma wrote: »

What is the common ground here though? There is nothing owing as far as the OP is concerned, the parking company is not likely to settle on anything less than the full amount.

The OP is likely to be to strong armed into something that they don't want to do, as in a settlement figure that is well into 3 figures. So with that I suggest to sticking to their guns.

At no point did I suggest the OP actually agree to anything in mediation. My point was that for the sake of an hour it is worth seeming as if you are 'reasonable' and you did your best to deal with the matter without going to court. Rather than ticking 'no' then being challenged by a judge as to why you decided not to at least try to mediate. I have seen this happen in County Courts, especially after the Jackson Report, which has focused the courts on saving costs.

Stroma

The judge won't ask why you didn't mediate though, quite obviously if you refused its because there is no common ground, meaning you believe that there is no money owing at all, so how can there be mediation when they won't settle on nothing? I think that you could even put your foot in it more by the mediation.

The people like kirby, bargepole and others who defend court claims are likely to say the same things.

da_rule

Stroma wrote: »

The judge won't ask why you didn't mediate though, quite obviously if you refused its because there is no common ground, meaning you believe that there is no money owing at all, so how can there be mediation when they won't settle on nothing? I think that you could even put your foot in it more by the mediation.

The people like kirby, bargepole and others who defend court claims are likely to say the same things.

The argument at mediation would be that there is no money owing. It will then be up to the mediator to try and get an agreement, but if the OP doesn't back down from the 'no money owing' argument then at least he/she has tried. Also, if the argument put to mediator is well rounded, i.e one from these forums, then it may convince the parking company to withdraw the claim. There is nothing to lose by mediation if you stick to your guns of not knowing anything and there are potential gains.

Also, a County Court judge in a case which I was recently in on asked the parties "So, what have you done to keep this matter out of court?" So yes it does happen [I'm just trying to dig through my notes for which case it was].

da_rule

Also, just a quick thought I had, if the parking company decide not to try mediation then the OP can use this as a 'sword' when it comes to costs and may be able to convince a judge to award him/her costs on an indemnity basis.

Stroma

How can there be any gains if the parties are at polar ends ? One party says there is nothing owing, the other says everything is owning. So meaning no common ground. And the mediator job is to try and stop a court case, and is likely to put pressure on settlement, as I said that figure would be close to what the ppc is asking for.

Stroma

da_rule wrote: »

Also, just a quick thought I had, if the parking company decide not to try mediation then the OP can use this as a 'sword' when it comes to costs and may be able to convince a judge to award him/her costs on an indemnity basis.

No it's not held against either side I think

IamNotAllowedToUseMyName

It may be that the phone mediation gets one side to realise that they do not have a leg to stand on. The point is to attempt to resolve without going to court, it does not necessarily mean compromise.