Appeal dismissed by IAS

Snakes_Belly

Thank you all for the tips about the postage. I will get a proof of posting rather than register. I forget sometimes that I am dealing with unscrupulous people.

Snakes_Belly

Quentin, in the Daniel Sans reply to a LBC he asks whether the claim is for breach of contract or trespass.

Quentin

But you have received a lbcca not a summons to the magistrates!

The 6 months window for a trespass case has long closed hasn't it??

Snakes_Belly

Thanks Quentin, I think that I have got confused by a very lengthy case that I read on the Prankster's site. I will stick to the main elements of the contract and the signage.


I will be making a counter claim though for harassment as they have used two collection companies and that according to Citizen's Rights website constitutes harassment. Those collection companies may be one and the same but I would not be aware of that when I received the letters. https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/debt-and-money/action-your-creditor-can-take/harassment-by-creditors/#h-what-doesn-t-count-as-harassment-by-a-creditor In the section on what constitutes harassment Excel have 1) Not informed me that they have placed the debt with collection agents 2) Used two collection agents at the same time.


It's not about the money though. It's about the principle.

Snakes_Belly

I am in the process of replying to the LBC and I just want to clarify something please. I cannot seem to ascertain who actually owns the land on which the event took place. The Travelodge have leased to Excel and in turn lease from what appears to be a consortium. The amount of rent that Excel pay to the Travelodge is included in their overall cash flow. Naturally I will be asking them to provide evidence of ownership/lease. My question is does a lease/sub lease give them the right to sue me for breach of contract or does it have to be the landowner or the main leaseholder? I certainly need to have clarity on this matter from the claimant. I am basing my reply on Daniel Sans example but I need to make it specific to my case. Thank you.

Umkomaas

The signage in the car park is the purported contract between the driver and whoever is named on that signage - presumably Excel. As such, in this context, it surely has nothing to do with leases, sub-leases or landownership?

The only ownership issue that comes into play is whether Excel had contractual authority to manage car parking and the right to sue in their own name.

Snakes_Belly

Thank you.

Snakes_Belly

Update.

I have now completed my response to the LBC and obtained a proof of posting. Thanks for the advice and help from this site. I have used some of the sample LBC's from the Newbie's thread but have changed it to suit my circumstances. As I unfortunately found this site later in the process I had admitted to being the driver at the time of the alleged breach, some of the wording did not apply in my case.

I have made a robust rebuttal however as Excel is a serial litigator I fully expect that they will continue with the process. I am thinking about making a counter claim. I'm not sure how it works. If I lose the main claim would my counter claim automatically fall through or could I still win the counter claim? I actually think that my counter claim looks stronger than my defence to the claimant. (There are some weaknesses in my defence and I know exactly where they will come from and I will be ready).

My main defence is frustration of contract. No consideration element of contract.
Excel may not have authority to sue. (Don't know that yet).
There are a number of issues with the signage. Some of it does not conform to the IPC's code of practice. There is also an enormous amount of information on their signage some in very small print.
As part of my rebuttal to their LBC I question their lack of professionalism.

"Professionalism"

"13.1 You agree to ensure that all your operators, servants or agents maintain a professional standard of behaviour when carrying out their duties and comply with the rule of law at all times"

The claim is disputed and as such should not have been passed to collection agents. Upon advising the collection agents that the claim is disputed they should have ceased contact and referred the matter back to you. Failure to advise me that you were passing my information to collection agents and the use of multiple agents amount to harassment. Sending letters designed to look like court documents also constitutes harassment. Your conduct and that of your agents has been vexatious and unreasonable throughout the process. This matter has caused me much anxiety and stress and therefore this may result in a counter claim for harassment as defined by The Administration of Justice Act 1970 S.40. "

I have referred their actions to the CAB who forwarded the complaint to Trading Standards and I have a copy of their email. Unfortunately I don't know the final outcome. Excel have also ignored any mitigating circumstances.

I don't know whether to just rely on the court to make a judgement on whether Excel's behaviour has been unreasonable or whether to make a counterclaim for harassment. I am really quite angry.

Some of the letters that I have received from debt collectors suggest that the debt had been assigned but no notice of assignment was sent from Excel. I can only assume that the letter was designed to be menacing by suggesting that the claim had been assigned. I have asked them to confirm whether the claim has been assigned and it will be interesting to see how and if they answer that question.

I don't know anything about Parking Law but I do have a modicum of knowledge about finance and their agents behaviour is so unprofessional.

I did notice that Excel have had issues with their meters at other sites at best this is very poor customer service and at worst it's entrapment. Interesting that Excel seem to issue a lot of tickets at the Peel Centre. Could have added to the demise of stores like Toy's R Us.

Thank you.

The_Deep

Have you seen the HOC video?

http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

Snakes_Belly

Deep. I've seen some the comments quoted in posts but hadn't watched the video. I have just watched it. Thank you for bringing it to my attention. I shall go through it again and makes some notes. They do mention the collection agent.


My LBC did not come from a solicitors. It came directly from Excel Litigation department.