Letter Before Claim - SCS Law & UKPC - Please Advise

beamerguy

DAngel said ...I’m not the expert, by any means, however my expenses were dismissed as the judge said that she didn’t not think that they had behaved unreasonably - I think I got parking and mileage awarded and that was it. 

There is confusion about costs and "unreasonable" 
Unreasonable is a much higher bar to claim and many judges are shy on this.
This is why it is very important to provide the judge with your costs schedule ... that means the costs such as time spent, travel/fuel, car parking etc.   For most that will be around £90. This is a small claims court and it means just that.
If you can prove their claim is unreasonable then that is a separate issue which the judge will deal with

nosferatu1001

"Further costs for Claimant's unreasonable behaviour, pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 27.14(2)(g)"
You have stated the C has behaved unreasonably
How are you planningon demonstrating that unreasonable behaviour to the court? Or are you hoping the court will just take your word for it?

D_P_Dance

The court is very unlikely to tke your word for it, read this,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonability

CVKTA

DAngel said:

I’m not the expert, by any means, however my expenses were dismissed as the judge said that she didn’t not think that they had behaved unreasonably - I think I got parking and mileage awarded and that was it. Like you, I spent nearly 2 years back and forth with them, but i wasn’t prepared when she said she didn’t agree they were unreasonable, so I just said ok and went on my way (I was just pleased to get the hell out of there!).  I think what the folks here are suggesting is, if you care enough to do it as I know how stressful this whole process is, pull together a crib sheet or some bullet points with examples of ‘unreasonable behaviour’ by them, and if the judge argues that they have not been unreasonable, you will have your notes in front of you, all prepared, to say how you think they have been. 

Not sure if you have been before, but Court is Pretty dreary, scary and not a nice place to be (even when you win!). I’ve been 3 times this year, once for myself and twice in support of someone else. I’ve also been in the house whilst someone else was having a zoom & telephone hearing during covid and one thing I will say to you is this - no one who goes to court, unless you are legally trained, is expected to be an expert. Yes, be prepared, yes be polite, yes be respectful etc but that’s all obvious. Withe the help of the forumites, you have built a really strong case - you can relax in the knowledge that you have done your very best here, whatever the outcome. You’ll be in your own home which in itself is much more comforting than the court setting, and you will be guided by the judge throughout. In my experience, they are not scary ogres, they are fair and kind (although I can’t speak for all). Just read your witness statement and defence several times through that morning or night before (the judge will also read it, thoroughly), and with any luck, the scs rep will be a bumbling idiot (like mine was) and not be prepped in the slightest. 

You’ve got this - we are rooting for you, let’s get another win under our belt!! :-) 

Thank you so much for taking the time to offer your advice. Still got some work to and the confidence keeps wavering but hoping common sense prevails and they can be defeated. Will work on unreasonable behaviour stuff tomorrow now, thanks again!

CVKTA

nosferatu1001 said:

"Further costs for Claimant's unreasonable behaviour, pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 27.14(2)(g)"
You have stated the C has behaved unreasonably
How are you planningon demonstrating that unreasonable behaviour to the court? Or are you hoping the court will just take your word for it?

I’ll work on this and come
back. Thanks guys

CVKTA

Hi guys,
Any thoughts on my 2nd Scheduele of Costs draft below:

In the County Court at XXXXX

Claim Number: XXXXXX

Hearing Date: XXXXXX

 

DEFENDANTS SCHEDUELE OF COSTS

 

Ordinary Costs

·       Loss of earnings/leave, incurred through telephone appearance on 07/09/2020 - £60.00

 

Sub Total - £60.00

 

Further costs for Claimant's unreasonable behaviour, pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 27.14(2)(g)

N.B – Claimant has acted unreasonable by failing to show adequate supporting documentation as to why they have the legal authority to add on £60.00 per Parking Charge Notice.
These unexplained additions equate to £300.00 or over 30% of their entire claim.
Evidence of this legal authority was requested during the early stages, fully supporting and following the Pre-Action Protocol.

Further and final requests were made, shown in pages 1-2 of my evidence bundle but were ignored by the Claimant.

It is the Defendants view that the Claimant has acted unreasonable and deliberately dishonest since the start of these proceedings.

 

·        Research, preparation and drafting of documents (22.5 hours at Litigant in Person rate of £19 per hour) £427.50

·        Stationery, printing, photocopying and postage: £37.50

Sub-total £465.00

 

TOTAL COSTS CLAIMED - £525.00

Umkomaas

DEFENDANTS SCHEDUELE OF COSTS

DEFENDANT'S (apostrophe) SCHEDULE (spelling)

Loss of earnings/leave,

Loss of half a day's earnings/leave

It is the Defendants view that the Claimant has acted unreasonable and deliberately dishonest since the start of these proceedings.

Defendant's (apostrophe) ........ unreasonably  ....... dishonestly  (but I'd be very circumspect about throwing that in - any absolute proof?  No need to answer that here, you just need to have all your proof should the Judge ask you for it). 

'Unreasonable' is a very high bar to get over. Think pole vault, not 100 metre hurdles. As the issues you list above appertain in almost every court case we see, I can't see anything a Judge could hang his hat on. 'Dishonesty' however is a different kettle of fish, and should you have categoric proof, that might be an approach to take - but I'd be very careful. 

D_P_Dance

Some judges take an unreasonable view of the meaniing of ureasonable imo.   In the law of Negligence, the reasonable person standard is the standard of care that a reasonably prudent person would observe under a given set of circumstances..  

CVKTA

Thanks guys. Would it be wise to remove the ‘NB’ section?

Umkomaas

CVKTA said:

Thanks guys. Would it be wise to remove the ‘NB’ section?

What do you think?