Have been dealing with UKCPS, now got a letter from a solicitor. Advice?

fairleee

Herzlos wrote: »

I don't think there is a standard letter.

Apologies, I should have clarified that I meant a template letter - other than the outline of the details of the claim, all the other text in the letter is identical to what I have seen in other posts.

So yeah, for now I'm sending a modified version of Gan's letter, along with a paragraph that I'm reporting them to the SRA for breach of conduct.

Herzlos

fairleee wrote: »

Apologies, I should have clarified that I meant a template letter - other than the outline of the details of the claim, all the other text in the letter is identical to what I have seen in other posts.

Sorry, I meant I don't think there is a template SRA complaint letter. The letter you got will definitely be a template letter from Miah.

Guys_Dad

The_Deep wrote: »

Spooner or later the SRA will realise that the profession is better off without firms like Miah.

Actually Miah is quite an appropriate name. It may very well be a homonym and abbreviated form of Mea Culpa.

fairleee

Ok, I've used Gan's letter as a starting point, and then have added a bit of beef to it by saying that I'm going to report them to the SRA, with details of the various breaches of the code of conduct (which I found on Hoohoo's useful post on Pepipoo). Would it be worth posting the full letter here before sending it?

fairleee

Ok, this is the letter I'm sending - does it all look ok?

Monday 5th October 2015

Dear Sir/Madam,

Re: Your ref: [xxx]

I am writing to acknowledge receipt of the above letter.

Notwithstanding that I deny any debt to UKCPS, I note that your letter demands £150 for legal costs. Your client has either failed woefully in its duty to mitigate costs or the sum has not been incurred and the demand is fraudulent. In neither case am I liable for the payment.

If you insist that the charge is justified, please provide a copy of your invoice to UKCPS. If this is not possible, please confirm:

1. The Invoice number and details of the VAT component
2. The date that your client paid the invoice
3. Details of the time spent and activities performed for which you charged the client £150

If none of the requested information is provided, I require a full explanation for the charge. To me, this appears to be a debt collection letter masquerading as a Letter Before Claim, and as such it breaches both the Practice Direction on Pre-Court Action, as well as the SRA’s Code of Conduct. I will not enter into any discussion of the UKCPS parking charge until I am satisfied by your reply.

I am also making a formal complaint to the SRA against your firm for breach of professional conduct. Based on public forums it is immediately apparent that this is a template letter that has been sent to dozens of other people, and there is no way that you could have run up £150 in legal fees for such a letter. You appear to be in breach of the Code of Conduct in at least the following ways:

• Per the Code of Conduct section IB 11.8, “Demanding anything for yourself or on behalf of your client, that is not legally recoverable, such as when you are instructed to collect a simple debt, demanding from the debtor the cost of the letter of claim since it cannot be said at that stage the cost is legally recoverable”. Solicitor’s costs are not recoverable in Small Claims Court, apart from a £50 filing fee (for a claim of £100). It should also be noted that Paragraph 5 of the Pre-Action protocol explicitly states that costs incurred must be proportionate. A £150 cost for issuing a template letter is not proportionate to a £100 claim.
• Per Section O5.5, “Where relevant, clients are informed of the circumstances in which your duties to the court outweigh your obligations to your client”. Your duty here is to explain to your client what you have to do to properly file a claim, and what costs are not reclaimable; by charging your client £150 to send a debt collection letter which you cannot be reasonably expected to recover in the small claims track, you are in breach.
• Finally, per Section IB(11.7), “Taking advantage of an opposing party's lack of legal knowledge when they have not instructed a lawyer”. You are operating on the assumption that I will not instruct a lawyer for a small claim such as this, and as a lay person would not necessarily know that this charge is not proportionate or valid. This is a deliberate attempt to take advantage of my assumed lack of legal knowledge.

Do not contact me again other than to provide the answers to my questions.

Yours Sincerely,

me

Thoughts?

The_Deep

I suspect that you will hear no more from Miah about this, you are obviously a troublemaker

MothballsWallet

Guys_Dad wrote: »

Actually Miah is quite an appropriate name. It may very well be a homonym and abbreviated form of Mea Culpa.

Or they're fans of Star Wars Episode 1 and Jar Jar:

Miah Stupid, Stupid, Solicitor

Herzlos

I'd be inclined to not tell them what their breaches are - no point doing their job for them or giving them an opportunity to prepare for any SRA investigation.

Dropping the bullet list and changing the sentence before it to:

"You appear to be in breach of the Code of Conduct in at least three instances."

Obviously include the full details in the SRA complaint.

fairleee

Herzlos wrote: »

I'd be inclined to not tell them what their breaches are - no point doing their job for them or giving them an opportunity to prepare for any SRA investigation.

Dropping the bullet list and changing the sentence before it to:

"You appear to be in breach of the Code of Conduct in at least three instances."

Obviously include the full details in the SRA complaint.

Yeah, maybe - I wanted to include details to make it clear that I'm a "hot potato" and get them off my back; I felt a bigger, beefier letter would be more likely to get them to drop it! I do take your point about any potential SRA investigation, though.

The_Slithy_Tove

fairleee wrote: »

I felt a bigger, beefier letter would be more likely to get them to drop it!

Quite the opposite. If you've perused some other of Gan's (of Pepipoo) letters, you'll notice their brevity and focus. The point is to allow them no wriggle room, and to ensure that any answer they do give you undermines their own position. Putting in more than is necessary allows them to waffle and obfuscate on the unimportant parts of your letter, and potentially allows them you use your own words against you.

Less is more.