Gladstones responded to my LBC rebuttal

AntrimMark

Background- June 2018 I received a proper LBC from Gladstones reference a Gemini parking charge and following the forum advice responded with a strongly worded letter telling them that the LBC did not comply with PD and requested specific details.

I 'd not heard from them until a week ago when I received an email from one of their trainee solicitors, responding to all the points I raised and giving 30 days to pay up or face proceedings.

Is this standard practice for Gladstones now? In previous dealings with me they've just gone straight to issuing a claim for without showing their hand.

Umkomaas

They must provide 30 days in a formal LBC. It should also include with it some information sheets and a form for detailing all your financial information (do not complete this, your finances are none of their business!).

AntrimMark

Thanks Umkomaas.
My reason for posting was that in previous instances GLadstones have ignored my robust response to their LBC, proceeded to claim and had the claim struck out for poor POC's.

The difference this time is they have provided a reasonably detailed response to my request for detail following their LBC. I've not experienced this before and was surprised they didn't go straight to claim. I wondered if they are providing more detail now in the hope that their claim won't be struck out before hearing stage?
Has anyone else experienced this and what is the recommended course of action?


I've copied the correspondence below.

"I have received your Letter Before Claim dated xxxxx.

Your letter contains insufficient detail of the claim and fails to provide any evidence your client is seeking to rely on.

You and your client must know that since 01 October 2017 a new protocol is applicable to debt claims and since proceedings have not yet been issued, the new protocol clearly applies and must be complied with.

Your letter lacks specificity and breaches both the requirements of 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 requires your client to provide. Your client must not issue proceedings without complying with the 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 when costs come to be considered.

As solicitors you must be familiar with the requirements of both the Practice Direction applicable pre 1st October and the Protocol which applies thereafter (and your client, as a serial litigator of small claims, should likewise be aware). 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. I find it astonishing and deeply concerning that a firm of Solicitors would ignore Practice Direction and the new Protocol in sending such a vague 'Letter before Claim', void of any evidence whatsoever.

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. 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
5. 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.
6. Is the claim for trespass? If so, provide details.
7. A copy of the contract with the Landowner under which your client asserts authority to bring the claim.
8. A plan showing where any signs were displayed.
9. Details of the signs displayed (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed)
10. Provide details of the original charge, and full details of any interest and administrative or other charges added.

I am clearly entitled to this information under paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction.
Furthermore, I require it in order to comply with my own obligations under paragraph 6(b).

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 will draw to the court’s attention the fact that I have expressly requested this information.

Until your client has complied with its obligations and provided this information, I am unable to respond properly to the alleged claim and to consider my position in relation to it, and it is entirely premature (and a waste of costs and court time) 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."



Their response, (almost 10 months later):



"We believe our Letter Before Complaint is compliant with the most up to date version of the Pre-Action Protocol (‘the Protocol’) however and without concession, we would be grateful for clarification as to your position with respect to non-compliance with the same.

It is noted that you have not provided an account of your version of events as is required by the Protocol.

Despite the above with a view to expediting matters, please find enclosed evidence our Client may later rely on should the need for proceedings arise. We also enclose a copy of the Annex 1 Information Sheet, the Reply Form and the Standard Financial Statement.

We trust the above and the enclosed clarifies our Client’s position with respect to the outstanding debt. In the event you are still unsatisfied with the above, please find below our responses to your numbered questions below;
With regards to page 2 of your letter, please find below our answers:

1) The motorist entered into a contract to park on the land pursuant to the signs with our Client, Gemini Parking Solutions London Limited. The contract allowed the motorist to park in accordance with the signs or, the motorist can choose to pay £100 for the privilege to park outside of the conditions as stated on the signs found throughout the land.

The driver on the day for the charge for PCN xxxxxx parked otherwise than in accordance with the signs. The sign makes a unilateral offer for all motorists to purchase and display a ticket authorising the period of their stay. On the date in question, a ticket was not purchased nor displayed and in doing so, they accepted the charge of £60 upon parking.

Payment of the charge has not been forthcoming within the relevant time frame (28 days) and as such, the contract has now been breached and further costs incurred. These costs were incurred directly a result of the breach in having to facilitate the recovery of the debt. Furthermore, our Client’s Accredited Trade Association also states that an additional fee may be applied upon the matter being referred for enforcement.
2) Your details were provided as the registered keeper of VRN xxxxxxx when a request was made to the DVLA under the reasonable cause criteria. On the enclosed Notice to Keeper, you were provided with the opportunity to nominate a driver. As neither we nor our Client are yet to receive any nomination; our Client will therefore aver, given your lack of response, that you as the registered keeper of the vehicle were also the driver on the date of the incident.
3) Our Client has complied with the provisions of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012; they will therefore elect to pursue you as keeper of the vehicle but may also aver you were the driver as outlined in 2) above.
4) Please see enclosed evidence and our Letter Before Claim for details.
5) Please refer to 1).
6) The Claim is for contractual breach as outlined at 1).
7) Our Client’s position is that the contract entered into is between itself and the motorist to which it acts as the Principal. Any other contract is therefore superfluous when considering liability. In the event a Court order specifies that a document to this effect must be provided, our Client will comply.
8) Please see the attached bundle.
9) This is not relevant to the charge at this stage. Our Client’s signs are audited and approved by their Accredited Trade Association and as such are sufficient.
10) The initial Letter Before Claim contained within it an error of the sum claimed. The amount sought was incorrectly stated to be £xxx however please be advised the sum outstanding is £xxx and we attach for your attention an amended letter before claim which contains the correct sum.

The parking charge accepted upon parking was £60. The additional costs are explained at Paragraph 1).

In view of the above and the enclosed, it is our Client's position that the sum of £xxx remains outstanding within 30 days from the date of this email. In the event that neither a substantive response nor payment is made within this time-frame our Client may elect to issue legal proceedings without further notice.

Payment can be made by calling our payment line on 0333 0230 049 or on our website https://www.gladstonessolicitors.co.uk
Alternatively, you can make payment via bank transfer. Our bank details are as follows;
Account Number:
Sort Code:
When making payment using any of the above methods please quote our reference"

Umkomaas

The difference this time is they have provided a reasonably detailed response to my request for detail following their LBC. I've not experienced this before and was surprised they didn't go straight to claim. I wondered if they are providing more detail now in the hope that their claim won't be struck out before hearing stage?
Has anyone else experienced this and what is the recommended course of action?

Yep, so detailed that they didn’t even proof read it.

"We believe our Letter Before Complaint is compliant.......

Their ‘Letter Before Complaint’, !!!!!! is one of those?

And we’ve seen that woeful template before. Read this one:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5981424/hx-car-park-management-court-claim

I’d just not respond to that and see where things go.

Coupon-mad

It is just a template, seen many times before.