Respond with the following:
Subject: Response to your Letter of Claim (Ref: [reference])
Dear Ms Marth,
Thank you for your email and attachments.
For the record, you have provided only:
• A “parking charge”/discount letter dated 24 April; and
• A PDF containing two ANPR images and two number-plate close-ups.
These do not meet your client’s pre-action obligations. Your response fails to comply with the requirements of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (“the Protocol”) and the Practice Direction – Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols (“PD-PACP”).
1. Protocol compliance and disclosure
Your Letter of Claim does not satisfy paragraphs 3.1(a)–(d) of the Protocol or paragraphs 6(a)–(c) of the PD-PACP. Those provisions exist to facilitate informed discussion and proportionate resolution. If any of the items requested below have been omitted, please provide them. If you contend that any are “disproportionate or not relevant”, please specify which, and explain why with reference to the issues you say will be pleaded.
I therefore require the following:
a) Notice to Keeper / PoFA evidence
The “discount” letter dated 24 April is not a Notice to Keeper. Please confirm whether you rely on Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) to hold the keeper liable, and if so, provide the NtK you rely upon and demonstrate compliance with all mandatory provisions (including creditor identification, a defined period of parking distinct from mere entry/exit times, the para 9(2)(e) invitation, para 9(2)(f) warning, issue and delivery dates).
b) Evidence of the period of parking
The ANPR images depict moments of entry and exit only. They do not evidence a period of parking nor establish where the vehicle was stationary, what signage was visible from there, or that any terms were agreed.
c) Signage and contractual terms
Please provide contemporaneous photographs of the exact entrance and core-terms signage in situ on the material date (not library images) together with a site plan. Quote verbatim the specific contractual term(s) you allege were breached as they appeared on that signage on that date.
d) Landowner authority
Provide the unredacted, contemporaneous landowner agreement (or the full chain of authority) conferring your client with authority to issue and enforce charges, and to litigate in its own name.
e) Quantum and add-ons
Supply a detailed breakdown of the principal sum and the precise legal basis for any additional “debt recovery” sum. Reliance on trade-association codes does not confer recoverability. If you continue to pursue any amount above the principal charge, identify the exact contractual term relied upon or confirm that the add-on is withdrawn.
f) Person with conduct and authorisation
Confirm the full name, position, and authorisation status (under the Legal Services Act 2007) of the individual with conduct of this matter.
2. “Appeal window”
Your reference to an “appeal window” is immaterial. Compliance with the Protocol is not contingent on whether a trader’s own appeal process was used.
3. “Genuine pre-estimate of loss”
You assert the amount owed is a “genuine pre-estimate of loss.” That is incorrect in law. ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 confirmed that such charges are not assessed as liquidated damages or GPEOL. If your client relies on Beavis, please identify the legitimate interests and commercial justification said to apply and explain how the signage and circumstances here are materially comparable.
4. Add-on “debt recovery” fees
Your reliance on BPA/IPC guidance to justify a £70 surcharge is misconceived. Absent a freestanding contractual entitlement that was clearly displayed and agreed, such sums are unrecoverable in addition to the principal charge. Please confirm whether you intend to pursue any sum beyond the principal and, if so, the contractual and legal basis.
5. Settlement proposal
Your “without prejudice” offer of £100 is noted. Liability is denied. Until your client complies with its pre-action duties and provides the documents requested above, the claim cannot be meaningfully evaluated. If you intend an offer to be “without prejudice save as to costs”, please mark it accordingly.
6. Next steps
Once a Letter of Claim compliant with the Protocol and PD-PACP is served—including the documents and information specified above—I will take advice and provide a full Protocol response within 30 days.
If proceedings are issued without first supplying the outstanding documents and allowing that 30-day period, I will apply for a stay with costs under paragraphs 13–16 PD-PACP and invite the court to disallow any unrecoverable add-ons.
Please provide the requested materials within 30 days and confirm whether you rely on PoFA keeper liability.
Yours faithfully,
[Your name]
[Your address] | [email]
You respond to the Letter of Claim (LoC) with the following by email to info@dcblegal.co.uk and CC yourself:
Subject: Response to your Letter of Claim Ref: [reference number]
Dear Sirs,
Your Letter Before Claim contains insufficient detail of the claim and fails to provide copies of evidence your client places reliance upon and thus is in complete contravention of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims.
As a firm of supposed solicitors, one would expect you to be capable of crafting a letter that aligns with paragraphs 3.1(a)–(d), 5.1 and 5.2 of the Protocol, and paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction. These provisions do not exist for decoration—they exist to facilitate informed discussion and proportionate resolution. You might wish to reacquaint yourselves with them.
The Civil Procedure Rules 1998, Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols (Part 3), stipulate that prior to proceedings, parties should have exchanged sufficient information to understand each other’s position. Part 6 helpfully clarifies that this includes disclosure of key documents relevant to the issues in dispute.
Your template letter mentions a “contract”, yet fails to provide one. This would appear to undermine the only foundation upon which your client’s claim allegedly rests. It’s difficult to engage in meaningful pre-litigation dialogue when your side declines to furnish the very document it purports to enforce.
I confirm that, once I am in receipt of a Letter Before Claim that complies with the requirements of para 3.1 (a) of the Pre-Action Protocol, I shall then seek advice and submit a formal response within 30 days, as required by the Protocol. Thus, I require your client to comply with its obligations by sending me the following information/documents:
1. A copy of the original Notice to Keeper (NtK) that confirms any PoFA 2012 liability
2. A copy of the contract (or contracts) you allege exists between your client and the driver, in the form of an actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date, not a generic stock image
3. The exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions of the contract(s) which is (are) relied upon that you allege to have been breached
4. The written agreement between your client and the landowner, establishing authority to enforce
5. A breakdown of the charges claimed, identifying whether the principal sum is claimed as consideration or damages, and whether the £70 “debt recovery” fee includes VAT
6. The full name and role of the person with conduct of this matter and their regulatory status/authorisation to conduct litigation
I am clearly entitled to this information under paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction. I also need it in order to comply with my own obligations under paragraph 6(b).
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,
[Your name]