Civil Enforcement County Court claim

[Quark]

Re: Civil Enforcement County Court claim

The Particulars of Claim have been received. No photographic evidence included.

[mystery1]

Re: Civil Enforcement County Court claim

Have you filed acknowledgement of service ? If not do so now.

Did you also see that another user posted their reply from the sra ?

I have received this today

Thank you for your email of 18 February 2016.

Mr Michael David Schwartz (SRA number 118966) was admitted to the roll of solicitors of England and Wales on 15 March 1979 and holds a current practising certificate with the following conditions: Mr Michael David Schwartz's current practising certificate has been made subject to the following conditions pursuant to Regulation 7 of the SRA Practising Regulations 2011:

Mr Schwartz shall act as a solicitor only in employment, the arrangements for which have been approved by the SRA.
Mr Schwartz is not to be a recognised sole practitioner, manager or owner of an authorised body.
Mr Schwartz shall not hold, receive or have access to client money, or act as a signatory to any client or office account, or have the power to authorise payments in or out of any client or office account or any transfers from any client or office account.
Mr Schwartz shall immediately inform any actual or prospective employer of these conditions and the reasons for them.
In these conditions the definitions are as defined in the SRA Handbook Glossary 2012.

Reasons/basis

On 24 November 2014 the SRA raised the following allegations against Mr Schwartz:

Whilst he was employed as a consultant by "The Sethi Partnership Solicitors" from 20 December 2012 to 1 July 2013 he failed to pay client money received on account of costs into the firm's client account in breach of Rule 14.1 of the SRA Accounts Rules 2011 and in breach of SRA Principles 2, 4, 5, 6 and 10.
On 24 July 2013 Mr Schwartz was arrested and subsequently charged with an offence of causing the transmission of an image/sound from prison contrary to Section 40 of the Prison Act 1952. Although he was subsequently acquitted, he failed to notify the SRA of his arrest and charge at the time in breach of Outcome 10.3 and SRA Principle 7. In view of the above and other suspected misconduct, including trading as an authorised sole practitioner in or around 2012, the above conditions have been imposed on Mr Schwartz's current practising certificate.
The above conditions are considered to be necessary in the public interest and reasonable and proportionate having regard to the purposes set out in Regulation 7 of the SRA Practising Regulations 2011 and the regulatory objectives and principles governing regulatory activities as contained in section 28 of the Legal Services Act 2007.

There are also Findings and Orders that have been made by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) against Michael David Schwartz. The reference number is TRI/688-00-CBJ. For a copy, please contact the solicitors disciplinary tribunal on 0207 329 4808.

Please note that if a matter is due to be heard before the SDT, details can be found on our website at www.sra.org.uk/consumers/solicitor-check.page. If this is the case, we are unable to discuss the matter with you.

If you have any further queries, please Contact us.


Thank you for contacting the Solicitors Regulation Authority.

Yours sincerely

Joseph Sheppard
Contact Centre Officer
Solicitors Regulation Authority

M1

[Quark]

Re: Civil Enforcement County Court claim

I have received the same reply by email. I telephoned twice last week, both times was told the opposite. Maybe the email is a copy and paste job from their web site?

[mystery1]

Re: Civil Enforcement County Court claim

The email is more likely to be correct as the dates do not tally with the info you were given before. I's suggest a follow up email asking if he has been given any approval to work.

M1

[Quark]

Re: Civil Enforcement County Court claim

I have filed acknowledgement of service.

[Quark]

Re: Civil Enforcement County Court claim

What would be the best line of defence?

[mystery1]

Re: Civil Enforcement County Court claim

What would be the best line of defence?

It will be along the lines of jaymdefence.odt suitably amended, particularly with the solicitor issue included depending on how the responses go.

M1

[Quark]

Re: Civil Enforcement County Court claim

Are examples of where Civil Enforcement have not fulfilled Practice Directions and Protocols a sound defence against their claim?

[mystery1]

Re: Civil Enforcement County Court claim

Not really, no. It can, if the right judge sees it lead to issues for them but unless you actually make an application many will ignore or not do too much about it. It may make the claimant less inclined to turn up though and it certainly has more of an impact on unreasonableness when it comes to costs.

M1

[Quark]

Re: Civil Enforcement County Court claim

So outside of that I am left with...

6. Paragraphs 1 & 2 are outside my knowledge. The claimant is put to strict proof.


7. Paragraph 3, the claimant is put to strict proof. Para 90 of Parking Eye Ltd v Beavis makes it pretty clear that the signs should be large prominent and legible and obviously means that each car park is distinct and the claimant is put to proof that they have sufficient signage.


8. Paragraph 4 -The claimant is put to proof that those were the terms, they were prominent, large and legible.


10. Paragraph 7 is legal argument and is neither admitted nor denied as it is not an allegation. The quoted case is easily distinguishable from the matter at hand as it was a free car park and not a paid car park as the schedule of information indicates this is. The charge is an unenforceable penalty and an unfair charge both of which are proven by Parking Eye LTD v Beavis.


With reference to the Consumer Rights Act 2015 Schedule 2 part 1 para 6 ( or UTCCR 1999 SCHEDULE 2 REGULATION5(5) 1 (e) the charge is clearly an unenforceable contract term as the Operator is seeking to impose a charge in compensation that is vastly disproportionate to the parking tariff of only one pound that the Operator believes should have been paid.


11. Paragraph 8. The claimant is put to proof that they have any right to escalate the costs. The claimant had the choice not to litigate.

Are claimants allowed to submit evidence in court that has not been previously seen by the defendant e.g. ANPR photos, photos of signage etc?

[mystery1]

Re: Civil Enforcement County Court claim

Are claimants allowed to submit evidence in court that has not been previously seen by the defendant e.g. ANPR photos, photos of signage etc?

They should be submitted in line with the schedule the court issues which is usually at least 14 days beforehand. All the recent CEL cases have the same claim as to cost (£1) and i doubt very much that it's true in all cases.

M1

[Quark]

Re: Civil Enforcement County Court claim

Is the claimant's evidence submitted in response to the defence statement and can one modify the defence in response to the submitted evidence?

[mystery1]

Re: Civil Enforcement County Court claim

The evidence submitted should make the case as pleaded in the statement of case. If they wish to change the statement of case in response to the defence they need permission as per cpr 17 https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/pr...l/rules/part17 (as do you should you wish to change the defence, an application to the court costs money).

They can do a reply to defence (cpr 15.8) which, in theory, helps to narrow down the issues the court have to decide but seldom actually does. They cannot introduce new points, merely clarify matters. (they may try)

M1

[mystery1]

Re: Civil Enforcement County Court claim

Intending to sort defences out this weekend.




The schedule of information, is it in any way accurate/inaccurate ?




M1

[Quark]

Re: Civil Enforcement County Court claim

It all seems accurate. Had they replied to my request for a Letter of Action that complied with the court protocols I would have been inclined to negotiate a partial settlement, however they went straight to the court.