Tweet
Hi,
I have been receiving letters from BW Legel for some time now relating to a alleged “return within the no return time limit” claim that occurred on 20th may 2017. Letters that I have received and still have are:
Notice of pending county court judgment.
letter of claim.
and a letter that states that a county court judgment has been entered against me, that I received today (3rd April).
Firstly let me say that I am a very conscientious person when it comes to getting back to my car and this would never have happened. It’s fabricated and I have not recieved any evidence in picture form from BW Legal or Britannia parking.
I have been so confused with threads on other sites and until now I have not picked up 1 phone call or replied to any letters. Other sites threads have misleaded me and it seems when I should have perhaps replied to some of these letters I thought I was told not to.
I have however emailed BW Legel this letter that I copied off a site:
BW legal
Enterprise House
Apex View
Leeds
West Yorkshire
LS11 9BH
8th March 2019
Your Ref:
Dear Sirs,
I am in receipt of your Letter of Claim of 27th June 2018.
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 and the new Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (paragraphs 6 and 7) 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 solicitors 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 of 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. A plan showing where any signs were displayed
8. Details of the signs displayed (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed)
9. Provide details of the original charge, and detail any interest and administrative or other charges added
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.
Yours faithfully
Mike Miller
Please can anyone advise me what I now need to do?
Do I need to send a SAR letter now?
Any help is appreciated!
Thanks
Mike
I have been receiving letters from BW Legel for some time now relating to a alleged “return within the no return time limit” claim that occurred on 20th may 2017. Letters that I have received and still have are:
Notice of pending county court judgment.
letter of claim.
and a letter that states that a county court judgment has been entered against me, that I received today (3rd April).
Firstly let me say that I am a very conscientious person when it comes to getting back to my car and this would never have happened. It’s fabricated and I have not recieved any evidence in picture form from BW Legal or Britannia parking.
I have been so confused with threads on other sites and until now I have not picked up 1 phone call or replied to any letters. Other sites threads have misleaded me and it seems when I should have perhaps replied to some of these letters I thought I was told not to.
I have however emailed BW Legel this letter that I copied off a site:
BW legal
Enterprise House
Apex View
Leeds
West Yorkshire
LS11 9BH
8th March 2019
Your Ref:
Dear Sirs,
I am in receipt of your Letter of Claim of 27th June 2018.
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 and the new Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (paragraphs 6 and 7) 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 solicitors 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 of 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. A plan showing where any signs were displayed
8. Details of the signs displayed (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed)
9. Provide details of the original charge, and detail any interest and administrative or other charges added
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.
Yours faithfully
Mike Miller
Please can anyone advise me what I now need to do?
Do I need to send a SAR letter now?
Any help is appreciated!
Thanks
Mike
Comment