Free Traffic Legal Advice

I can upload all docs to imgur if required.

• The original notice
• Exact copy of your initial appeal
• Their response
• Exact copy of your IAS appeal
• The assessor's response
• Photos of the signage at the site

how long can I expect the process to take if this (inevitbly) goes to court?

What are my next steps? Do I contact the operator (Excel Parking), or do I wait for them to contact me?

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.

Because your letter lacks specificity and breaches the requirements of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (paragraphs 3.1(a)-(d), 5.1 and 5.2) as well as the Practice Direction - Pre-Action Conduct (paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c)), you must 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.

As solicitors you must surely be familiar with the requirements of both the Practice Direction and the Pre-Action Protocol for debt claims and your client, as a serial litigator of debt 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 embarrassing that a firm of Solicitors are sending a consumer a vague and un-evidenced 'Letter of Claim' in complete ignorance of the pre-existing Practice Direction and the Pre-Action Protocol.

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. 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; for how long it is claimed the vehicle was parked, 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. If the claim is for a contractual breach, photographs showing the vehicle was parked in contravention of said contract.
7. Is the claim for trespass? If so, provide details.
8. Provide me a copy of the contract with the landowner under which they assert authority to bring the claim, as required by the BPA/IPC Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP).
9. a plan showing where any signs were displayed
10. Photographs of the signs displayed (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed) at the time of any alleged contravention.
11. Provide details of the original charge, and detail any interest and administrative or other charges added
12. Am I to understand that the additional £70 represents what is dressed up as a 'Debt Recovery' fee, and if so, is this nett or inclusive of VAT? If the latter, would you kindly explain why I am being asked to pay the operator’s VAT?
13. With regard to the principal alleged PCN sum: Is this damages, or will it be pleaded as consideration for parking?

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]

Subject: Urgent Regulatory Report – Elms Legal Ltd – Duplicate County Court Claims and Abuse of Process

Firm name: Elms Legal Limited
SRA number: 633880
Firm address: 3 Osborne Street, Colchester, CO2 7DP

I am reporting Elms Legal Ltd for serious and deliberate abuse of process in connection with legal proceedings issued on behalf of their client, Excel Parking Services Ltd.

Elms Legal has issued two separate County Court claims against me for a single alleged parking contravention that occurred on 28 December 2024 at Crown Street 24Hr Pay Car Park (with no other address reference such as a town or city. Only one Parking Charge Notice (PCN) was ever issued, but I have now received two claims with different claim numbers, each based on the same facts, the same date, and the same vehicle. Neither claim form includes the PCN number, and both sets of particulars are identical and breach CPR 16.4.

This is a textbook case of cause of action splitting and constitutes an abuse of process under CPR 3.4. It is procedurally oppressive and professionally unacceptable.

I responded to Elms Legal’s Letter of Claim, dated 1 May 2025, on 29 May 2025 with a formal request for information under the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims. On 10 June 2025, Elms Legal confirmed in writing that the matter was on hold until 4 July 2025 to allow time to provide information. Despite that assurance, they had already issued the claims at the time they sent that email. This was a deliberate misrepresentation of the status of the matter, likely intended to suppress my legal rights and deny me an opportunity to respond meaningfully.

Their Letter of Claim also included a clearly inflated and unjustified interest figure of £13.60 at 8% without any proper calculation or legal basis. That figure was dropped from the claims themselves, proving it was used only to pressure settlement pre-litigation.

This conduct has caused me distress, wasted time, and unnecessary legal work. I believe it amounts to serious breaches of the SRA Principles and Code of Conduct, specifically:

– Principle 1: failing to uphold the rule of law and proper administration of justice
– Principle 2: failing to act with integrity
– Principle 5: causing harm to the public and undermining confidence in legal services
– Code of Conduct for Solicitors: including Rules 1.1, 1.2, 2.1(d), 7.1 and 8.1

I request that the SRA investigate this misconduct and take appropriate regulatory action. I have attached the relevant documents to support this report.

Yours faithfully,

[your name]
[your contact details]