Letter of claim from bwlegal

Palec

Thank you for your help. On balance I read Newbies on DQ, as for witness it was my wife but she is breastfeeding and will not attend the court, it is stressful enough for her, so the only witness will be me  as written statement from wife would not help much if I understand it properly.
I will be writing to CCBC and copy local MP, but to local MP I will broaden the story, to CCBC I can send in one go complaint and DQ, no mediation as I tried at the beginning offering £10, they wanted £100 as written here since 01/2014.
As for discontinuation and starting again from 2018 should I include it in my case  or simply copy it as written by Coupon-Mad for Isalasias case please?
Thank you, I have deadline 28.9, so have some time to do this properly.

Palec

So I have got these 2 versions, so my complaint is about procedural error and also want to mention that time limits, discontinuation.

This is formal complaint about case No XXXNNNN from 2018. ( or should I name it procedural error by CCBC?)
After I filed my defence via MCOL in 2018, I received a letter of discontinuance on [DATE] and the case appears to have been stayed rather than struck out.  That stay has now been lifted (and I believe the Claimant has not paid to lift the stay)  and I am being contacted again after 2 years even though the PCN was issued in  01/2014.  My research has found out this has been happening multiple times in the past two weeks.   Why has the CCBC allowed dormant cases to be restarted without a court fee, yet expects consumers to pay to object to this injustice? 
I wish for my letter/email to be put before a Judge because this is not justice and no application should be needed, if the Claimant parking firms have somehow been allowed to get away without one.
I assume this is a procedural error affecting lots of parking cases and no stays should be lifted after all these years and certainly not without the Claimants paying £255 for a hearing. Clearly this has been done by stealth in the hope consumers have moved house or are badly affected by the lock-down and will get a default CCJ now. 
FORMAL COMPLAINT ABOUT A PROCEDURAL ERROR BY THE CCBC 

CLAIM NUMBER XXXXXXX

Dear Sirs,
This is a formal complaint and I wish that this letter to be put before a Judge, please. 

I believe a serious procedural error has occurred within the CCBC and it affects dozens of consumer Defendants at a time when they are very likely to end up with a default CCJ as a direct result of the CCBC's actions.

It appears that several 2018 (long since stayed) 'unfair parking charge' inflated claims have been reinstated by the CCBC and mine is one of them.  I received your Directions Questionnaire out of the blue last week.  Luckily in my case, I had not moved in the past two years.

The case was stayed in 2018.  How can it be resurrected with no checks, now?  I believe this has either happened:
(a) in error by the CCBC
(b) as a result of a letter from a robo-claim solicitor, whose clients have taken no steps to re-check Defendant addresses.

In either case, it seems unlikely that the robo-claim solicitors have paid the requisite court fee or filed N244 applications to lift each and every stay.   Please correct me if I am wrong because I am struggling to understand how the CCBC can do this.

Even if the Claimants have applied and paid all fees applicable (£100 per claim), I object to the CCBC's decision to allow this, on the basis that this is likely to cause CCJs and offends against justice. 

At the very least, claims that are statute barred should have been excluded and the applicants should have had case management Directions requiring them to firstly supply evidence that the Defendants' addresses have been checked in 2020. The Claimants must be held to account, to ensure that Defendants who have moved are not all about to lose by default.

I remind the CCBC that the Government is still extremely concerned about the level of default CCJs and this action is likely to cause more.    Not only was there a review of processes, but the MHCLG are currently offering a public consultation about private parking charges which makes it clear that they are very concerned about the level of claims andCCJs, so this - plus the fact that we are in the middle of pandemic - makes it an wholly inappropriate time for the CCBC to resurrect 2018 claims from rogue Claimants, knowing the Defendants are likely not to be able to respond in all cases.

Surely you are not going to support a rogue industry to inflict default CCJs on all the Defendants, who can't return their DQ after this two year delay?  Where will this end?  Are parking company Defendants likely to see claims resurrected ten or twenty years in the future?

I am not in a financial position to throw £100 at an application to object to the Order the CCBC sent me.  What I want to know is, what has happened and has the Claimant made such an application after all this time, or is this a procedural error by the CCBC?

I am copying in my MP and will urge them to take this up with the MHCLG, who are currently consulting about the parking industry and who I am sure, will be alarmed to learn that archive cases (even some that are statute barred) are being resurrected without so much as an address check or (possibly) not even a fee being paid by the rogue industry to achieve this monumental feat, without a Judge even looking at the situation.

Yours sincerely ]

Your name (don't put 'Mr' as that is not part of your name).

Thank you for main text, am trying to amend it little bit to fit to my circumstances. Thank you for understanding.

KeithP

It is now nearly seven years since the alleged parking incident.

D_P_Dance

Think how much this must be costing the scammer, all over a £1 alleged underpayment.

nosferatu1001

Did uyou get a notice of discontinuance OR a notice it had been stayed?  BE PRECISE as they are different documetns!

Palec

Good point nosferatu1001, so on 4th October 2018 after I filed defence via MCOL  I received letter from HM Courts& Tribunals Service with my case number and name of PPS v my name and on right corner address CCBC with this text:

I acknowledge receipt of your defence. A copy is being served on the claimant ( or the claimant solicitor). The claimant may contact you direct to attempt to resolve any dispute. If the dispute cannot be resolved informally, the claimant will inform the court that he wishes to proceed. The court will then inform you of what will happen.
Where he wishes to proceed, the claimant must contact the court within 28 days after receiving a copy of your defence. After that period has elapsed, the claim will be stayed. The only action the claimant can then take will be to apply to a judge for an order lifting the stay.

Coupon-mad

It was stayed and they lifted the stay, same as all the other 2018 cases that CCBC are letting them do this for, without any evidence of checking 2020 addresses.  This latest wheeze by BW Legal is likely to cause CCJs by default.  They know that, we know that. 

Complain to the CCBC.  Either of your complaints is good and in fact the one written in your own words is better than copying another!

AND - please now make a real difference - A TASK FOR SEPTEMBER.

The Government is (this month only) consulting about a new statutory code of practice (CoP) and framework to rein in the rogue parking firms.  Read and comment on the draft CoP proposal and the enforcement framework consultation, and get everyone you know to do the same.

You will need to register to comment on the CoP and enter an occupation even if you are retired or a homemaker, but otherwise it is easy to navigate, and comment upon each section/subsection individually. You can save comments to edit later and or submit comments once you are happy with them.

https://standardsdevelopment.bsigroup.com/projects/2020-00193#/section

You do not need to register to comment on the enforcement framework which can be found here. It has a link on page 5 to make comments.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/913272/Code_Enforcement_Framework_consultation.pdf

At the very least, we say the parking charge level should be £50/£25 or higher level £70/£35, as per Council PCNs in E&W.  

And we say the added fake 'debt recovery' costs are just double counting the cost of letters, and MUST GO because that is unfair and illegal.

Please be heard.  You can bet the hundreds of PPCs will be commenting.

No apologies for repeating this vital 'call for action' to consumers, on every thread this month!

Palec

Thank you everyone, so I am sending complaint and DQ in one go to CCBC email tomorrow plus copy local MP and done what Coupon Mad suggested and will go to detail to make the difference with my local MP so that this does not continue to help others, too.

Palec

In general Directions Order is written that by 28.9 I must complete DQ ( form N180) and file it with the court office and serve copies on all other parties, which means PPS address, too? Would CCBC email be enough? Also as for font and type used, does it matter in these circumstances if it is written by e.g Arial 11 or has to be certain type please?

Fruitcake

"Serve copies on all other parties" means exactly that. Everything you send has to go to the court and the claimant.
I'm pretty sure the bargepole guide to court tells you the standard font size you need to use.