Gladstones Solicitors - letter before court

Draigcymraeg

Loadsofchildren123 wrote: »

SRA not very relevant here. CEL use WH for the LBC but then take it back in house.
You could complain about WH's non compliant LBC but any lack of response to questions/requested documents is then back in CEL's hands so not an SRA matter.

If they issue proceedings having failed to reply you apply for an immediate stay of the proceedings and an order that they comply, under para 15(b) of the Practice Direction - Pre-Action Conduct, which still applies as per para 7.2 of the new Protocol. You produce a copy of the correspondence to show their wilful breach of their obligations and that they are prematurely issuing claims to bully people like you into paying a debt they have not made any effort to show is due. The pre-action obligations apply to ALL litigants, yet CEL (along with all other PPCs) think they are immune. As a commercial litigant one might argue (as Sassii did and won) that they have a higher duty than Joe Public to comply.

I've made these arguments in a precedent costs argument which is on this forum somewhere on a Dropbox link. When I'm in work I will repost it here. C-M has probably got the link on the Newbies thread as well. The document contains other arguments which don't apply to you at this stage, but it sets out all the reported case law I could find on failures to comply with pre-action obligations and the courts' powers to impose sanctions.

Cant thank you enough for this. I'm still going through the links that were posted above! as to understand them fully.
If you could share that file it would be a great help into understanding this all that bit better!


really cant complain with anyone's input on here! as its been a massive learning experience! once again thank you all!

Loadsofchildren123

https://www.dropbox.com/s/4cn1tbjiim1ycsl/COSTS%20APPLICATION%20updated.docx?dl=0

Draigcymraeg

hey guys, finally got an update around 40 days after I emailed them..

Any advice on this would be much appreciated. starting to worry now giving that its just before christmas and money is already tight.

Thank you for your correspondence.

I have responded to your points in turn and to assist have used sub-headings.

You did not receive any correspondence

You have given no reasonable explanation as to why you wouldn’t have received the post. However, without concession, even if the post wasn’t received, this would not impact your liability to pay. The correspondence was sent after you became liable.

The Permit

The signs make it clear that a valid permit must be displayed and as evident from the photographs you failed to display a permit at the time.

Your Appeal wasn’t received by my client

I confirm my client did not receive an appeal from you and therefore no response could be given. In any event, had you appealed on the same grounds as you now do, it would have been refused.

Evidence

Please see attached the relevant evidence that you have requested.

They have emailed pictures of the car and files of the letters they "sent" but no proof of postage etc.

Payment therefore remains outstanding and is due within 7 days from the date of this email. Should payment remain outstanding after this time frame, specified legal proceedings will be issued and further costs sought.

Payment may be online at https://www.gladstonessolicitors.co.uk or via the payment line detailed below. Please ensure you quote your reference in full when making payment.



Thanks guys.

Umkomaas

For the avoidance of doubt, this thread is about LINK Parking not CEL (which seems to have crept in).

@OP - there’s not much more you can do at this stage other than wait to see what their next move is. If it does turn into a court case, it is defendable and there a some regulars who can help with defences - and they have a good record of success.

A court case will not occur this side of Christmas - if it comes to court, it will be around 5-6 months away.

Draigcymraeg

Cheers Umkomaas, I've noticed the pictures they have sent me are very low quality. and I can not make out the car registration on it. I am unsure whether they've deliberately sent a low quality picture on purpose or if this is the actual one they have on their system.

So would you suggest I just do not reply to this email.

As it states their "client" is open to offers of settlement.

Thank you for the very quick reply, its somewhat settled my looming doubt!

Umkomaas

I've noticed the pictures they have sent me are very low quality. and I can not make out the car registration on it.

If it goes that far it’s something you might argue in your papers to the court. Perhaps a judge might agree. But in a small claims court it’s ‘balance of probability’, not, as in a criminal court, ‘beyond all reasonable doubt’.

So would you suggest I just do not reply to this email.

If there’s information to which you are entitled via the new Pre-action Protocol (PaP), then by all means fire something back at them and get them to produce it. Make yourself as unattractive to pursue as possible (without becoming unreasonable). Maybe they’ll look for less difficult cases - but I don’t want to build any false hopes, given that there are 4 tickets in play here.

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/pdf/protocols/pre-action-protocol-for-debt-claims.pdf

As it states their "client" is open to offers of settlement.

Of course they are - pay them what they’re asking for in their most recent demand, and they’ll settle - no doubt!

If you are going to make an offer, do so only in writing, and anything you write in the context of making an ‘offer to settle’ is marked ‘Without Prejudice’. This way, if you can’t settle, they can’t go waving your offer (or anything you say in relation to it) in front of the judge to show there being any accepted liability by you.

Draigcymraeg

on the PAP you just linked me to,
it states this
"the creditor should not start court proceedings less than 30 days from
receipt of the completed Reply Form or 30 days from the creditor providing
any documents requested by the debtor, whichever is the later. "

The underlined bit is relevant as in their email above, they state they are going to start court proceedings within 7 days of them sending that email

"5.2 If the debtor requests a document or information, the creditor must –
(a) provide the document or information; or
(b) explain why the document or information is unavailable,
within 30 days of receipt of the request. "

This was not completed within 30 days of my request.

Umkomaas

You’re now as informed as I am on the PaP - I’m not a lawyer, so make what you can of it if you think there’s any further mileage in it for you.

Draigcymraeg

This is my reply to them..

Good morning Daniel,

In response to your reply above,

I request you refer to Para 4.2 of the PAP; which states

In any event, the creditor should not start court proceedings less than 30 days from receipt of the completed Reply Form or 30 days from the creditor providing any documents requested by the debtor, whichever is the later.

I have highlighted the applicable part to bring your attention to the above statement you made, which states " Payment therefore remains outstanding and is due within 7 days from the date of this email. Should payment remain outstanding after this time frame, specified legal proceedings will be issued and further costs sought"

Also i would like to refer you to Para 5.2;

"5.2 If the debtor requests a document or information, the creditor must –
(a) provide the document or information; or
(b) explain why the document or information is unavailable,
within 30 days of receipt of the request. "

This being that the email sent to yourselves was received 41 days prior to me receiving a response,

I have also noticed in the evidence requested you have omitted the request for the proof of postage, and the pictures received of the car that appears in the photographs are of such low quality you can not make out the number plate, which begs me to believe that it is my car in question.
please could you send higher quality photos.

Many Thanks


Any advice on this would be appreciated.

Umkomaas

It’s far too ‘chummy’. Get rid of and change to a more businesslike language the ‘Dear Daniel’, ‘I request that you refer’, ‘I would also like to refer you to’, ‘please could you send’, ‘Many Thanks’.

Have you not noticed they are trying to sue you, they’re not inviting you to their Christmas party!

Make your letter much more formal.