What makes a real letter before claim?

[SRow66]

I received a letter yesterday from a company that says it manages my park home site on behalf of the owner/freeholder. At the top in capitals it said ‘LETTER BEFORE CLAIM’ & it went on to say I had an agreement with them to pay £100/month but that I hadn’t paid it for 9 months so I owe them £900. it gave me 14 days to pay in full or said they’ll take me to County Court.

however, the letter was dated almost 2 weeks ago. It genuinely arrived yesterday - by 24-hour tracked postage which shows it was sent on Wednesday afternoon. There was no other info in the letter - not forms for me to complete for example. Nothing just a one-page wrongly dated letter.

I don’t have any agreement with the management company. The amount they say I’m liable to pay the OWNER (so not the management company) is wrong. I’m involved in a live case at the property tribunal where the management company are also claiming they’re the owner but they’ve not proved they are (despite the tribunal ordering them to (currently waiting on a decision from that tribunal on this)).

Ive read up on thing and know I have to reply and I’m planning on asking them to evidence the agreement they say I owe them money under, plus pointing out the monthly amount is wrong.

Is there anything else I should ask?

And is the letter of claim even ‘valid’ if they’ve not sent me all the additional info such as the forms to return?

Do I need to worry about not replying by their 14-day deadline, which is tomorrow, given they didn’t post the letter until 2 days ago? I’d like more time to get legal advice?

thanks in advance

[echat11]

Hi SROW66

Welcome to LB

You are right to ask for evidence, list the documents you require as proof.

Amend the following, make sure you get Proof of Postage.

https://businessdebtline.org/sample-...iability-debt/

Also send them a Subject Access Request -

https://legalbeagles.info/library/gu...ccess-request/

[PallasAthena]

We see letters from debt collectors quite often which are dressed up to look like a formal Pre-Action Protocol Letter of Claim [PAPLOC] but which aren't.

They often head the them "Letter before Action/Letter before Claim" to try and frighten the people they send them to into thinking formal legal processes have begun when they haven't. The correct heading for a PAPLOC is "Letter of Claim" - note the difference between "before claim" and "of claim".

The required contents of a PAPLOC for small money claims are set out in paragraph 3 of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims here:

debt-pap.pdf

What you have received does not sound like a genuine PAPLOC. It does not have the forms specified in Annexes 1 and 2 included. And it does not comply with the PAPLOC timescales. PAPLOC allows the alleged debtor 30 days to reply [paragraph 4 of PAPLOC] not the 14 days they are giving you.

I reckon it's just another debt collection frightener, but compare it the Protocol and make your own mind up on that.

That's not saying you should ignore it, I don't know enough about the underlying debt dispute to comment on that.

There's no reason why you couldn't include in your letter asking for more evidence that their letter was only received on date xx/xx/xxxx and you will not be replying within their requested timescale.

[atticus]

A letter before claim is:
- a letter
- asserting a claim
- expressing an intention to take court action if the claim is not resolved.

There are pre action protocols which set out what these letters should contain, for different types of claim. Best practice is to comply with the appropriate protocol.

In your case, why not point out the dates of posting and receipt?