Letter of Claim - BW Legal/NCP

Thanks both for the speedy responses.

beamerguy - unfortunately I disposed of the the debt collector letter and can't recall the name of the collector - it was the first I'd heard of the parking charge, so assumed it was some sort of scam/scare tactic to try and extort money... but now this >.<

Umkomaas - yes, drivers licence and V5C have been updated, which I guess is why I am now receiving these letters (assume the initial correspondences went to previous address before I'd updated). There is just an extra letter in the name; will check my V5C when I start drafting my response later. Is it worth noting in my response that I did not receive any PCNs from NCP, or is that irrelevant?

Thanks Umkomaas,

Having looked at the Newbies thread, Daniel San's template appears to be the best fit for this case. I just have a few of question with regards to the below draft:

1. What signature should I use on the letter? When reading the newbies I see there is a note about not putting your own name, but is that just if I am not registered keeper?

2. Am I better sending this via email or letter or does it not really matter?

3. The LBC states under the heading "Particulars of Debt:" On x, you were granted a limited contractual licence to enter the land known as ("Site"), which is managed and operated by Our Client. In return, you were to abide by certain terms and conditions ("Terms and Conditions") which were prominently displayed on the signage erected in situ by Our Client. On x, you breached the Terms and Conditions by Parked without payment of the parking charge ("Breach")...

Does this make points 5 and 6 of the list in the response irrelevant or is it still worth including?

3.1 Is a breach of Terms and Conditions different to a contractual breach?

4. I have only made a few amendments to the original template (highlighted in orange). Are these ok?

5. I genuinely have no recollection of the incident in question - the carpark was one I used to use for dropping off/picking up my girlfriend form work, so all I can assume was I was waiting a little longer than usual on the date in question and have gone over the allowed grace period or something. Is it worth including anything about this in the response?

6. I am assuming that now I have received an LBC, I am past point of POFA appeal?

7. Is there any advantage to delaying sending this response at this stage? I have until 20th Sept to submit a response.

Draft response below:

Date

Your Ref:xxxxxxxxxxx

Dear Sirs,

I am in receipt of your Letter Before Claim of x.
Your letter contains insufficient detail of the claim and fails to provide copies of evidence your client places reliance upon.

Your client must know that on 01 October 2017 a new protocol is applicable to debt claims. 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 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 you have referenced the Pre-Action Protocol For Debt Claims in your letter, 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. 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. Provide me a copy of the contract with the landowner under which they assert authority to bring the claim, as required by the IPC code of practice section B, clause 1.1 “establishing yourself as the creditor”
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 detail any interest and administrative or other charges added
11. Provide a copy of the Information Sheet and the Reply Form


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.

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.

I also bring to your attention your reference to your client issuing a PCN for the alleged incident, as well as attempts to engage with me. I have not received either a PCN or any other correspondence from your client relating to this matter since the date of contravention detailed in your letter, and therefore request evidence of these being issued.

Further to the above, any claims or future correspondences are to only be served to my address of service, which is:
XXX
XXX
XXX

Yours faithfully

Thanks once again for all the advice Umkomaas. I'm away for the next few days, so will leave this for now in case anybody else comments or wishes to offer any pearls of wisdom and then get on with sending it next week.

I have no recollection of the original incident, and have certainly never received a PCN from NCP - the first I heard of it was the debt collector letter I received c. 2-3 weeks prior to the LBCC.

Based on previous advice I have read/been given, I chose to ignore the previous letter as I was of the understanding that they often do not pursue and are just empty threats trying to get you to make contact with the baliffs, which, again, I have been advised not to do in the past. Therefore I've not yet taken any steps to refute the claims.

Clearly this case is different as I have now received the LBCC, which is why I have started this thread and turned to the forum for advice.