Letter before claim recieved

BRS7

Thanks keithp I was using that example as reference also. In all honesty this doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to me and comes across as jargon. Is this part what I should be adding?

Your letter lacks specificity and breaches both the requirements of the previously applicable Practice Direction - Pre-Action Conduct (paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c)) and the new Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (paragraphs 3.1(a)-(d), 5.1 and 5.2. Please treat this letter as a formal request for all of the documents / information that the protocol now requires your client to provide. Your client must not issue proceedings without complying with that protocol. I reserve the right to draw any failure of the Claimant to comply with the protocol to the attention of the court and to ask the court to stay the claim and order your client to comply with its pre-action obligations, and when costs come to be considered.

As solicitors you must surely be familiar with the requirements of both the Practice Direction applicable pre-1 October and the Protocol which applies thereafter (and your client, as a serial litigator of small claims, should likewise be aware of them). As you (and your client) must know, the Practice Direction and Protocol bind all potential litigants, whatever the size or type of the claim. Its express purpose is to assist parties in understanding the claim and their respective positions in relation to it, to enable parties to take stock of their positions and to negotiate a settlement, or at least narrow the issues, without incurring the costs of court proceedings or using up valuable court time. It is astounding that a firm of Solicitors are sending a consumer a vague and unevidenced 'Letter before Claim' in complete ignorance of the pre-existing Practice Direction and the new Protocol.

KeithP

Yes, and a longer list of requirements.

Together with this sentence:

Nobody, including your client, is immune from the requirements and obligations of the Practice Direction and now the Protocol.

BRS7

Thanks keithp I now inluded those three paragraphs and added two extra requirements (below). Is it good to go? The letter I received says “a charge of £60 per parking charge has been applied to each parking charge notice if they have been referred to our clients debt recovery agent as per signage at the site”. I read on another thread that they cannot include debt collector addons, is this correct?

SCS LAW
Level 34
25 Canada Square
Canary Wharf
London
E14 5LQ

...November 2017

Your ref:............

Dear Sirs,

I have received your Letter Before Claim dated 10th November 2017.

Your letter lacks specificity and breaches both the requirements of the previously applicable Practice Direction - Pre-Action Conduct (paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c)) and the new Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (paragraphs 3.1(a)-(d), 5.1 and 5.2. Please treat this letter as a formal request for all of the documents / information that the protocol now requires your client to provide. Your client must not issue proceedings without complying with that protocol. I reserve the right to draw any failure of the Claimant to comply with the protocol to the attention of the court and to ask the court to stay the claim and order your client to comply with its pre-action obligations, and when costs come to be considered.

As solicitors you must surely be familiar with the requirements of both the Practice Direction applicable pre-1 October and the Protocol which applies thereafter (and your client, as a serial litigator of small claims, should likewise be aware of them). As you (and your client) must know, the Practice Direction and Protocol bind all potential litigants, whatever the size or type of the claim. Its express purpose is to assist parties in understanding the claim and their respective positions in relation to it, to enable parties to take stock of their positions and to negotiate a settlement, or at least narrow the issues, without incurring the costs of court proceedings or using up valuable court time. It is astounding that a firm of Solicitors are sending a consumer a vague and unevidenced 'Letter before Claim' in complete ignorance of the pre-existing Practice Direction and the new Protocol.

Nobody, including your client, is immune from the requirements and obligations of the Practice Direction and now the Protocol.

I require your client to comply with its obligations by sending me the following information/documents:

1. an explanation of the cause of action
2. whether they are pursuing me as driver or keeper
3. whether they are relying on the provisions of Schedule 4 of POFA 2012
4. a copy of the contract with the landowner under which they assert authority to bring the claim
5. a copy of any alleged contract with the driver
6. a plan showing where any signs were displayed
7. details of the signs displayed (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed)
8. photographic evidence of the contraventions
9. what the details of the claim are; where it is claimed the vehicle was parked, for how long, how the monies being claimed arose and have been calculated
10. Is the claim for a contractual breach? If so, what is the date of the agreement? The names of the parties to it and provide to me a copy of that contract.

If your client does not provide me with this information then I put you on notice that I will be relying on the cases of Webb Resolutions Ltd v Waller Needham & Green [2012] EWHC 3529 (Ch), Daejan Investments Limited v The Park West Club Limited (Part 20) – Buxton Associates [2003] EWHC 2872, Charles Church Developments Ltd v Stent Foundations Limited & Peter Dann Limited [2007] EWHC 855 in asking the court to impose sanctions on your client and to order a stay of the proceedings, pursuant to paragraphs 13 ,15(b) and (c) and 16 of the Practice Direction, as referred to in paragraph 7.2 of the Protocol.

I am unable to respond properly to the alleged claim until I am in receipt of the requested information/documentation. At this point it would be a waste of court time and costs for your client to issue proceedings. Should your client do so, then I will seek an immediate stay pursuant to paragraph 15(b) of the Practice Direction and an order that this information is provided.

Yours faithfully,

....................

BRS7

Is this ok to go with?

...and also what sort of response can I expect?

nosferatu1001

Yes thats fine. Its standard fare

Who knows. Some may send out a proper form, some may ignore, some may send out a mish mash load of rubbish.

BRS7

Should I be sending this along side the reply form to comply with my side of the protocol? Obviously just selecting that I dont know whether I owe the money or not.

KeithP

BRS7 wrote: »

Should I be sending this along side the reply form to comply with my side of the protocol? Obviously just selecting that I dont know whether I owe the money or not.

If using the form, surely you would tick BOX D labelled I dispute the debt.

BRS7

Woops, yeah, that sounds better!

BRS7

Hi everyone,

I have received a response to the letter that I sent.

[IMG]hxxp://i67.tinypic.com/5foe3d.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]hxxp://i65.tinypic.com/25k263d.jpg[/IMG]

I would like to get a little advise before drafting my next response, firstly without knowing fully what is meant by “an explanation of the cause of action” i’m not entirely sure if they have satisfied this?

They haven’t specifically said whether they are pursuing me as the driver or keeper, I would like to push them on this.

They say they have complied with the provisions of schedule 4, is this the same as relying on and what does this even mean?!

They mentioned that the copies of contracts are redacted for commercial sensitivity...however I would like to argue that this is not fair as this is meant to be a contract they I have entered into and I have a right to see the complete contract.

They have included plans of the sites but there are no indications of where the signage is.

There are also copies of the signs, like PDF version type thing but no info on the height of them.

They have included photographs for all incidences but most of them literally show nothing, in darkness, with just the reg showing as reflecting from the flash. Definitely not proof of the alleged breach of contract.

I asked for details of the claim, they have included copies of the parking charges, I guess these pretty much cover this?

They haven’t specifically answered if it is a contractual breach just the final paragraph of the first page, is that a satisfactory answer?!

Many thanks in advance for your help.

BRS7

Anyone got any tips before I draw up the draft reply? As I said above i’m struggling to understand if they have fulfilled my requests fully....