HELP Possible mistake in acknowledgement of VCS Letter before claim

Dess

Hi, thanks for the amazing job you do. 
My boyfriend has received a LBC from VCS for some PCNs that we received two years ago during our old tenancy. We had a valid contract that stated our parking permit was included in the rent and didn't specify that we had to have a visible permit at all times. The first time we received a PCN we got it sorted through the reception on site, because they were in charge of printing our permits. The reception was incredibly disorganised and kept making mistakes and when we received the other PCNs they basically told us that we had to appeal them, because they couldn't do anything about it (LIES). We don't really remember how we got them, but we think that the parking permit fell off from the display. So we appealed saying what happened and that we had the right to park there as this was included in our tenancy agreement and we paid for it monthly. They agreed to the appeal, but said we still had to pay something like £60, so we replied to that saying that if they lowered it even further we would pay it, but we never got a reply. So we didn't pursue nor paid because we didn't know much and everywhere online there was written to ignore them (big mistake, I know now).
Now, two years after, my boyfriend received a LBC, although the car has been scrapped last year.
We might have made a mistake, because I was on the phone and I was unable to navigate the forum and I read an old thread and followed those guidelines.

These two pictures are the letter we received on the 05/08/20.

Don't know if I should cancel the reference too. It's the first time posting, please let me know if I missed something.

This is the email we send to them on the 10/08/20.

Vehicle Control Services Limited

F.A.O Litigation Department, 2 Europa Court, Sheffield Business Park, Sheffield, S91XE

10/08/2020

JB/Lit/VCS4711883x4

THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Dear Sir/Madam,

RE: Letter Before Claim dated 05/08/2020

I am writing to acknowledge receipt of the above letter and to inform you that it does not comply with the Pre-Action Conduct of the Practice Direction.

Your letter before claim was very misleading and is lacking essential information. It is baffling to me that a legal department staffed by solicitors cannot produce a compliant letter before claim. I feel concerned that I, an unrepresented person without legal training, have to refer you to the Practice Direction. I would urge you to review your standards for future proceedings.

I request that you send me a letter before claim compliant with the Practice Direction so that I can deal with my own obligations under the Practice Direction and give you a response.

Please refer to the following extract from the Pre-Action Conduct of the Practice Direction:

“2. Claimant’s letter before claim

2.1 The claimant’s letter should give concise details about the matter. This should enable the defendant to understand and investigate the issues without needing to request further information. The letter should include –

(1) the claimant’s full name and address;

(2) the basis on which the claim is made (i.e. why the claimant says the defendant is liable);

(3) a clear summary of the facts on which the claim is based;

(4) what the claimant wants from the defendant;

(5) if financial loss is claimed, an explanation of how the amount has been calculated; and

(6) details of any funding arrangement (within the meaning of rule 43.2(1)(k) of the CPR) that has been entered into by the claimant.

2.2 The letter should also –

(1) list the essential documents on which the claimant intends to rely;

(2) set out the form of ADR (if any) that the claimant considers the most suitable and invite the defendant to agree to this;

(3) state the date by which the claimant considers it reasonable for a full response to be provided by the defendant; and

(4) identify and ask for copies of any relevant documents not in the claimant’s possession and which the claimant wishes to see.

2.3 Unless the defendant is known to be legally represented the letter should –

(1) refer the defendant to this Practice Direction and in particular draw attention to paragraph 4concerning the court’s powers to impose sanctions for failure to comply with the Practice Direction; and

(2) inform the defendant that ignoring the letter before claim may lead to the claimant starting proceedings and may increase the defendant’s liability for costs.”

Be aware of the Court’s powers to apply sanctions for non-compliance with the Practice Direction. I expect to receive a fully compliant letter before claim within 14 days. Should you fail to do so, I will seek the assistance of the Court.

Please read and reply to this letter and understand that if you send me a letter that does not follow the Pre-Action Conduct of the Practice Direction I will forward your correspondence to the Solicitors Regulation Authority and ask it to investigate your breach of SRA Standards and Regulations.

Yours faithfully,

I am wondering wether this was the best way to reply to them, because the post was so outdated. They haven't replied and I don't know what to do next. I know that if I made a mistake we are in time to sort it. What do you think that we should do now? Give me some advice please.

Thanks for the help.

Umkomaas

None of that matters that much, wait for a formal court claim to be launched and deal with that then (with forum help if you wish). Start preparations (it's almost inevitable that a claim will come seeing that 5 separate tickets are in play) by reading the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, second post, which covers all court related stages and processes. 

It's interesting to note that the LBC does not include a (capped) Legal costs charge of £50, nor what has become 'Abuse of Process' debt collection/contractual costs of £60 per ticket. Let's see what the N1 Claim form says when it comes. 

Redx

Yes redact any references , any VRM details , any PCN references , plus any names and addresses

Doesn't really matter what your reply said , but usually you ask them to place the matter on hold whilst the defendant seeks debt management advice

Plus email a SAR to the DPO at VCS to obtain all the data , attaching copies of 2 recent redacted utility bills as proof of I D under the GDPR law , this comes from the defendant only , nobody else , but anyone else can assist the victim

VCS will issue a court claim pack from the CCBC in Northampton next month probably , so prepare the defence and let us see it , but only the altered paragraphs from the coupon mad template , we don't need to see the unaltered paragraphs

Fruitcake

Dig out your old lease/AST if you still have it, or obtain one from the previous landowner/management agent/letting agent, and read exactly what it says and doesn't say about parking, permits, PCNs, and court claims. This will have primacy of contract over anything a third party scammer says.
Get pics of the site and signage if possible.
Have a look on google street view in case the entrance/signs are visible for the date of the alleged event.

Complain to the previous landowner/MA or whoever employed the scammers. They are jointly responsible for the actions of their contractors. (Complain after you have found/obtained the old lease/AST).

Dess

I don't really know what you mean by this. We will await formal court claim and keep you updated.

Umkomaas said:

It's interesting to note that the LBC does not include a (capped) Legal costs charge of £50, nor what has become 'Abuse of Process' debt collection/contractual costs of £60 per ticket. Let's see what the N1 Claim form says when it comes. 

Dess

Thanks for letting me know that everything is still fine though. I thought I messed it up. We will contact the DPO and prepare our defence.

Dess

Fruitcake said:

Dig out your old lease/AST if you still have it, or obtain one from the previous landowner/management agent/letting agent, and read exactly what it says and doesn't say about parking, permits, PCNs, and court claims. This will have primacy of contract over anything a third party scammer says.

We have been through the lease and it doesn't seem to say anything about it, but I will scrutinise it carefully again.

Fruitcake

What your lease is silent on is just as important as what it says.
If there is no mention of permits, PCNs, paying PCNs, or court claims in your lease, then the scammers have no right to issue PCNs or court claims.
Your lease will also normally grant you the right to quiet enjoyment, and that reasonable changes can be made to an existing lease. However, employing a scammer to take away your existing rights to park and quiet enjoyment cannot be considered reasonable.

Fruitcake

Dess said:

I don't really know what you mean by this. We will await formal court claim and keep you updated.

Umkomaas said:

It's interesting to note that the LBC does not include a (capped) Legal costs charge of £50, nor what has become 'Abuse of Process' debt collection/contractual costs of £60 per ticket. Let's see what the N1 Claim form says when it comes. 

Normally when a scammer or scamlicitor sends an LBC or a court claim, they include recoverable (allowed) legal costs of £50 and also unrecoverable costs in the order of £60 that judges up and down the country have declared an abuse of (the court) process. This has been the norm for so long that it is unusual to see a claim without the add on charges.

Umkomaas has noted this and is saying, let's see if they appear on the claim itself.

Umkomaas

Dess said:

I don't really know what you mean by this. We will await formal court claim and keep you updated.

Umkomaas said:

It's interesting to note that the LBC does not include a (capped) Legal costs charge of £50, nor what has become 'Abuse of Process' debt collection/contractual costs of £60 per ticket. Let's see what the N1 Claim form says when it comes. 

Almost every PPC has been adding the Abuse of Process charges (unlawful) and they all add £50 (lawful) Legal costs. The AoS charges are regularly kicked into touch by Judges if the case is fully defended, but those that are not defended (many) that lead to a Judgment in Default sees the PPC get everything they ask for. So many try their hand because there's nothing much to stop them by way of sanction. A good punt for them. 

I find it a bit odd why VCS (a particularly litigious operator) seems not to have taken a punt with your case. Time will tell. 

Read other threads (particularly @beamerguy's Abuse of Process thread) to learn and understand more, especially important if the Claim form does include the £60 a ticket try-on. 

Dess

Fruitcake said:

Normally when a scammer or scamlicitor sends an LBC or a court claim, they include recoverable (allowed) legal costs of £50 and also unrecoverable costs in the order of £60 that judges up and down the country have declared an abuse of (the court) process. This has been the norm for so long that it is unusual to see a claim without the add on charges.

Umkomaas has noted this and is saying, let's see if they appear on the claim itself.

Oh, I understand now. Thanks for letting me know about it.