Parking Eye PCN Claimform - Goodmayes Hospital, IIIford , Goodmayes Hospital, Barley Lane, Ilford , IG3 8XJ

[BazzaS]

Unrealistic.

You can’t impose charges on them, claiming that if they reply they accept those charges:

a) since you are engaged in conversation with them, and parties to litigation are expected to engage with each other to avoid matters proceeding to a hearing, as far as is reasonably possible,

b) Some of their responses will be mandated by the process, such as DQ and WS’s.

Unreasonable threats won’t impress a judge, will be unenforceable and give the impression “I don’t know what I’m doing, and my case is so weak I have to resort to empty threats”.

[BazzaS]

Small claims track of county court.

costs limited (including reclaimable solicitors’ fee, if a party chooses to use a solicitor). So, yes you can charge but it’ll be capped at £100.

 

If you are asking for £200 per letter in, £300 out, the judge might ask were you planning to stop at 1/3 of your letter (while chortling to themselves….)

Edited July 16, 2023 by BazzaS

[BazzaS]

Collusion between whom?

[BazzaS]

1 minute ago, Reapstar said:

Well, there are three parties involved. One of them is the innocent party. One makes no money, two make money. 

Who do you believe is the third party colluding?

Have you looked at CPR27.14 and PD27A?

[BazzaS]

35 minutes ago, Reapstar said:

I also just noticed that they claim the event took place in ILLFORD, I Have never heard of that place before, I know Ilford but not ILLFORD,  I'm sure this error invalidates their claim?

De minimis.

 

Why risk obscuring your (good / viable) points with dross (£300/letter, Ilford vs. Illford) that might serve to irritate a judge?

[BazzaS]

Not conflicting : 2 different issues.

1) Don’t go down the £300/letter and/or Illford vs Ilford route on their claim against you : don’t risk irritating the judge

2) Ways you can seek redress against them :  DPA / SAR non-compliance. Potentially you claiming against them.

[BazzaS]

20 minutes ago, Nicky Boy said:

And as the fleecers made their offer  under a "without prejudice" clause...

Add something like:

If you insist on pursuing this through the courts, this letter will be brought to the attention of the Judge.

 

???

If it says “without prejudice” or “without prejudice save as to costs” ; you can’t bring it to the judge’s attention with regard to whose favour the judgement gets made in, only after judgement (then regarding costs£

[BazzaS]

Why not?

depends what you mean / expect  by “equality”

Lady Hale’s speech is available on the Supreme Court website:

https://www.supremecourt.uk/docs/speech-181029.pdf

Since your post is one line, and I don’t know if your expectations are reasonable / your understanding of “equality before the law” is correct, here’s an (oft cited) image to help.

http://i2.wp.com/interactioninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/IISC_EqualityEquity.png?zoom=2&resize=730%2C547
 

expect equality. Expect some accomodation towards equity. Don’t expect full, unequivocal equity : especially in Small Claims Track (SCT)

(So, they can waste time / money on the case, can use hours of  a solicitor’s time, and can pay for that. You might not be able to pay for that. So, you might feel that is unequal.

But [equality] : neither of you can recover the full cost of hours of solicitors time in the SCT. Equality for those costs is provided by the costs limits for SCT that apply to both sides.
 

 

Edited August 1, 2023 by BazzaS

[BazzaS]

You can defend their speculative invoice. The court can decide not to enforce payment of their speculative invoice 

if you send them a speculative invoice for your time: they too can defend it, and the court can decide not to allow it, too.

Expect equality.