2 x Parkingeye Notices

[mystery1]

Re: 2 x Parkingeye Notices

Hi, thanks, I have sent this off.

I received another letter from DRP today threatening legal action for the other claim/offence.

Letter attached.

Many thanks

Unless you get a letter before county court claim again, i'd ignore, unless you wish to give them £150.

M1

[Anders]

Re: 2 x Parkingeye Notices

I will ignore.

Thanks

Unless you get a letter before county court claim again, i'd ignore, unless you wish to give them £150.

M1

[Anders]

Re: 2 x Parkingeye Notices

Hi, I have just received the attached, including the original standard letter, which I have not scanned.

Not sure where to go from here?

Many thanks,

[mystery1]

Re: 2 x Parkingeye Notices

Back later with a reply. Idiots.

M1

[Anders]

Re: 2 x Parkingeye Notices

Thanks

[mystery1]

Re: 2 x Parkingeye Notices

Dear Ms Breaks,

Thank you for your letter dated xxxxxx the contents of which are noted.

I draw your attention, once again, to the pre action protocols which can be found at https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/pr...action_conduct

I further draw your attention, again, to the SRA code of conduct which as a solicitor you should be familiar with. The relevant part can be found at http://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/han...5/content.page


Your contention that your Letter before county court action is compliant despite it clearly being adequate is a disgrace to your profession. To become a solicitor one must be well educated. To that end i can only assume your comments are deliberate and calculated as the only other explanation involves a lack of intelligence which clearly with your qualifications cannot be so. The pre action protocols state "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 4 concerning 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." If your letter before county court action complies with this requirement then i must be blind. For the avoidance of doubt, I confirm that am not blind.

Your contention regarding 2.1 of the PAPs is interesting in that you have quoted only part of it even though i quoted it all to you. I will requote 2.1, 2.2 & 2.3

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


I ask again, where in your letter before county court action is ADR mentioned ? Where is the list of documents ?


I note from your letter of xxx that only people who breach your terms pay for such things as sign maintainace, monitoring systems, staff wages, trade memberships etc which are not costs that a single breach can caused. One assmes if the court of appeal rules against commercial justification n Parking Eye v Beavis you will rescind your potential claim ?


As can be seen from the PAPs that i have shown you for the 2nd time the time for disclosure is now.

It is noted you refuse to use popla but have not spoken of ADR at all.

The timescales you quote are incorrect as i sought further information from yourselves upon which i would seek advice on. You haven't really co-operated and i note that your letter arrived on 12/02/15 which coincedentally is the date you say is my last day to respond.

I look forward to you showing better co-operation and not trying to take unfair advantage of myself which i remind you, again, is against the Solicitors code of conduct.

Yours etc

M1

[Anders]

Re: 2 x Parkingeye Notices

Many thanks!

[Anders]

Re: 2 x Parkingeye Notices

Hi M1, latest response attached. I'm not sure if this is an attempt to wear me down or if they are convinced they have a case and will pay the fee to go to court?

Thanks

[Anders]

Re: 2 x Parkingeye Notices

Last 4 pages.

[mystery1]

Re: 2 x Parkingeye Notices

Did the letter actually refer to the pre action protocols as they claim ?

M1

[Anders]

Re: 2 x Parkingeye Notices

From what I can see they have highlighted various paragraphs from previously sent documents.

Many thanks

[mystery1]

Re: 2 x Parkingeye Notices

Was that section actually there on the one you were sent originally though ?

To answer your other question, yes they wish to wear you down so you pay up because it's not worth the stress. Private Parking Companies 101.

M1

[Anders]

Re: 2 x Parkingeye Notices

Exactly which section should I be looking for? I will then check previous paperwork.

Thanks

[mystery1]

Re: 2 x Parkingeye Notices

1 - the bit they say refers to the pre action protocols.

M1

[Anders]

Re: 2 x Parkingeye Notices

Sorry but I really don't understand what I am looking for and from which paperwork.

"Did the letter actually refer to the pre action protocols as they claim ?"

Which letter?

Much appreciated