Appeal Refused - What Now?

Coupon-mad

Like here:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/01/update-on-michael-schwartz-now-of-civil.html

Same as all the rest, covered here and on pepipoo on dozens and dozens of threads. And 'Schwartz' is one of the easier words to search on this forum as it only ever crops up in threads like yours, so read up on it.

northseajoe

Exactly right, Coupon-mad (though I wasn't even worth a scrawled signature). Michael does seem to be quite a lad.

Coupon-mad

So they've stopped getting the tea-boy (allegedly) to scrawl a different signature every time?! These ones are among the most hopeless if they go to a small claim and are almost fun to write a defence for - but there are several on here already written that you can crib from, if it comes to that stage (no biggie!).

northseajoe

You almost make it sound like fun, Coupon-mad; almost but not quite. Good try, though, and thanks again.

I've spent a happy half-hour reading about Merry Mr Schwartz, but can I just check I've understood what happens next, please?

Step 1: I send a reply (a slightly modified version of the one I posted earlier). I get a receipt of posting (or whatever it's called) and I also e-mail.

Step 2: This is the bit I'm not sure on. LazyDaisy's excellent sticky on LBAs seems to suggest that CEL will send a generic response to my letter. In this case Step 3 will involve me writing another request for more detailed information.

However, some other threads seem to suggest that CEL may just ignore my letter, and proceed to County Court. Is that right?

Coupon-mad

Yes that is right, the 2016 threads tell it like it is.

northseajoe

... here is my acknowledgement to CE's LBA (I'm getting the hang of this acronym business now).

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Address Redacted[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]****[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]***[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]**[/FONT]


[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]9 July 2016[/FONT]



[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Dear Sir[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]For the Attention of the Legal Team[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]This letter refers to PCN **redacted** . Thank you for your unsigned letter with no senders name, dated 5 July 2016, headed Letter Before Action, which I acknowledge. [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Firstly, you should note that - for the reasons outlined in previous correspondence - I regard the above PCN as a speculative invoice and I shall robustly dispute this claim.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Secondly, you should note that although your letter states it is 'in accordance with Pre-Action Conduct and Protocol', it clearly isn't. To assist you, I have attached a summary of the Protocol Guidance, and ask that you re-issue your notification in a form which complies with the Protocol requirements.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Finally,please ensure that a qualified person reads the details of this claim, and responds to this letter in a professional manner, providing specific information relating to the intended legal proceedings and your cause for action. This is a very specific case - PLEASE do not rely on a generic FAQ-type reply. That would not meet the requirements of Practice Direction, and would not enable me to provide a full response.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Yours faithfully[/FONT]


[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]***name redacted***[/FONT]

Coupon-mad

Yep, a short version is fine, as is a longer one like this person has prepared:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/70971837#Comment_70971837

Also in your shoes I would add something that makes it obvious that you have read all about Mr Schwartz and you noticed that no-one has attempted his signature on the letter, which is telling, in the light of recent wildly-differing 'Michael Schwartz' signatures (and surname spellings) in the public domain. I would add a threat to report him to the SRA for this misleading letter because it is misleading, has no cause of action or facts, is merely a well-documented template photocopy with his name on it which CEL are clearly using to scare people into paying.

I would be looking to make them think, ''oh, this one might defend a claim and we would have wasted a court fee - let's move on to an easier victim who hasn't sussed our little game''.

northseajoe

Thanks, Coupon-Mad. I thought about a longer reply, requesting more information, but decided against it.

I did visualise some odious minion pondering whether to put my letter on the 'Proceed to Court' pile or the 'Likely to Cause Trouble' pile, but I decided that the LTCT pile (I'm really getting into acronyms now) would possibly still end up with court action when CE had consumed all the low-hanging fruit. I'd rather get this out of the way ASAP if possible.

Obviously, I won't hold my breath...

northseajoe

... I also doubted whether Mr 'Solicitor-of-the-Year' Schwartz would be motivated by yet another threat of the SRA. I will report him to the SRA if push comes to shove, but I just won't warn him beforehand.

Coupon-mad

Sounds like you have got not just the acronyms but you have a handle on the entire scam. There was a flurry of CEL claims in Feb/March on forums and robust defences were submitted - and I can't recall any proceeding further, CEL didn't pay a hearing fee that I can recall.

They are obviously after scaring victims into paying or defending weakly and picking them off. Must be raking in a fortune and the flipping UK Supreme Court in their infinite wisdom, gave these scum the green light with their awful decision in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis.