Civil Enforcement (CEL) Defence - Help please

I think you must refer to the case law in that letter - add a para:
the C's conduct clearly falls within that contemplated in [name of case and all the references which follow it so the judge can look it up if (s)he wants to] as reaching the threshold of unreasonable behaviour and a costs order should be made.


Small comments:
1st par: the reference to the PD here should be to paras 3, 6a and 6c rather than 16 (the ref to 16 in the next para is correct)


What's the reference to PD paras 22-3 - which PD are we talking about here?


Para numbered 3- 2.1-5 of what? If it's a rule or a PD say which one.


para numbered 5 - attach copies of these so the court can see. I think probably also attach a copy of their rubbish LBC and refer to that so the court can see how you were not given any proper information.


para number 7 - "its ATA Code of Practice" (add ATA). Attach a copy of the relevant extract.


Enclose any documents you refer to.


Costs schedule - all looks good, I'd reduce the time for AoS and DQ from 30 minutes to 15, but I'd add a couple of hours to your WS and perhaps some to your defence, they must have taken you longer than that.


I understand completely that you want to avoid a hearing. I'd feel the same. So add to the letter "I would like the court to deal with this matter on paper without requiring a hearing, which it has the power and discretion to do" and confirm you've sent a copy of everything to the Claimant. I think there's a good chance CEL wouldn't turn up to any hearing, but I understand you want to avoid this altogether.


I'd send that letter off, and send a copy to CEL with a without prejudice offer saying you'll accept £250. If you beef up the schedule with extra time on drafting documents then it will come out at somewhere around £350 I think.


I think you should add at the end of the costs schedule: in the event of a court attendance:
loss of earnings: £95
Travel and parking: £x
Time at court: 2 hours


Just a quick Q. I'm assuming your proceedings were pre-1 October, and so it is the old Practice Direction - Pre-Action Conduct which applies, rather than the new Protocol for Debt Claims?


Play around with the letter - it's a good letter, but you need to separate out your complaints about the pre-action conduct and the court's powers under para 16 of the pre-action PD from your other costs argument which is that it also has the power to award you costs under R27. As it is now these two arguments are a bit jumbled together. I find that putting headings in helps you to separate out arguments. Say clearly at the start that the court has the power to order costs under two separate provisions, namely ......


You've provided the case law for one of those (the PD) but not the other (R27) so you definitely need to add in reference to the case law on R27 costs orders (which is in one of my previous posts).

Don’t mention the offer letter to the court.
Yes, if they accept offer then they send you the money and you then withdraw the costs claim. But only after payment is received.
And yes, it’s the old PD that applies to you.

You quote Dammerman in relation to the R27 argument. Those other cases are the precedents in support of a costs order under the PD. Include in the application argument that they never sent you a LBC so you never had any opportunity to explain your very valid defence.