Hello Lewis my name is ***** ***** I will help you with this.
For now please let me know whether the Company chasing you did anything to get the settlement or was it all you?
They sent several emails however upon reviewing some of them I did CC them. Like I said they made very little impact with us securing this debt and I think it speaks volumes they don't even know the final settlement amount.
Here is the final email thread...
You really do write a good practical letter. Grateful.
On 13 Oct 2014, at 17:09, LEWIS HONNEY (ORG) wrote:
Further to a board level meeting today, we have agreed to extend our timescale for a response from the Department of Health to 31st October 2014.
Should we consider seeking a legal option after the above date, can you clarify which address we ought to send any future correspondence?
From: Verdon, Steve [mailto:*****@******.***]
Sent: 10 October 2014 15:04
To: ***** ***** (ORG)'; 'Watson Hope'
Cc: Billam, Sara; Inglis, Kate; Farress, Ben
Subject: RE: Letter re LHonney/Realfundraising
Dear Mr Honney
Thank you for your email. I regret that I can only reiterate what I said in my earlier email and am unable to offer a timetable for this matter at this point. This is a complex matter, of some age, which has required us to undertake significant investigation and research, and which we wish to give the consideration it deserves. I can say that we will undertake to reply once that work is completed and we have received the appropriate advice in order for us to respond fully to the points you have raised.
From: LEWIS HONNEY (ORG) [mailto:*****@******.***]
Sent: 10 October 2014 13:16
To: ***** *****; 'Watson Hope'; Farress, Ben
Cc: Billam, Sara; Inglis, Kate
Firstly, I don't concur the comment of 'organisational neglect' made by our legal representative. We made every effort to communicate with NHS surrey and was simply ignored at the time. This comment was made by our legal representative before he was fully furnished with all the facts regarding this matter.
In response to your email below, we are also looking to avoid placing this matter into the legal process. I however must insist that we agree a reasonable timescale for completion with your investigation. Should we not agree a deadline regarding this matter today, then regrettably I see no alternative but for us to explore legal action without delay in order to settle this dispute.
If you wish to suggest a deadline date as indicated above, then I will advise if that is acceptable.
Sent: 10 October 2014 12:09
To: ***** ***** (ORG)'; 'Watson Hope'; Farress, Ben
Subject: Letter re LHonney/Realfundraising
Thank you for your email and I am aware that you sent further email traffic to Ben Farress, my EA, whilst I was on leave. I did say in my previous letter that I would respond and I have been liaising with litigation colleagues to investigate the matter. This matter has been passed to them to do that and I have, following receipt of your email, asked Kate Inglis to deal with the casework on this matter. I understand that Kate contacted you yesterday.
I do not accept that the lack of communication has been ridiculous. We have responded to previous requests and I have tried to explain that you are raising a matter which is several years old and which, as admitted in your representatives’ correspondence, was not properly progressed at the time due to organisational neglect. The organisation with which you might properly have raised this issue whilst it was in existence was abolished on 31 March 2013. The correspondence you provided also indicates that there was a concern over the submission of requests for payment and I am obliged to pursue that issue before considering payment. Our enquiries are continuing and regrettably I will not be in a position to conclude the matter by Monday 13 October 2014 as you suggest.
As I have indicated previously I am not seeking to place the matter into legal process but, given your letter providing notice that you wish to place the matter into legal process this coming Monday, the matter lies with you and any application will be dealt with by my team and Treasury Solicitors.
Sent: 10 October 2014 11:47
To: ***** *****; Farress, Ben
Cc: Verdon, Steve
Hi Ben, Steve
My position is that we are willing to explore a compromise in recovering this debt, however the lack of communication from the Department of Health has been ridiculous.
If we don't receive a response by 5pm Monday 13th October 2014, I ask our legal team to explore other avenues to recover this debt.
It's my objective to find a harmonious resolution to this matter.
From: Watson Hope [mailto:*****@******.***]
Sent: 10 October 2014 11:26
To: ***** *****
Cc: 'LEWIS HONNEY (ORG)'; Verdon, Steve
Subject: Re: Letter re LHonney/Realfundraising
I wonder if you found time to do that.
On 22 Sep 2014, at 16:26, Farress, Ben wrote:
Thanks for your note.
As you may have seen from Steve’s out-of-office response, he is on leave until next week. I will raise this with him on his return.
OK, Let me look a few things up
The law says that a person is entitled to a reasonable fee for reasonable work done. Therefore they are only entitled to their fee if they have actually done work.
If they have not done the work, then they are not entitled to a fee. If they have done some work then they are entitled to some fee, or administration costs - but if they have not done anything substantive then they are not allowed the full fee.
You can refuse to pay
The matter is them for try and pursue you. If they took it to Court anything for £10,000 or under would be a small claim
This means that costs are limited and they won't get legal fees
As such the onus is on them to show you they did actually do something
But clearly they have not - you did most of the work
Can I clarify anything for you about this today please?
Thanks - very interesting. Wise and Co want me to disclose the actual amount we secured from the NHS. Should I disclosure this amount my argument is they don't even know how much was secured so why should we pay them a fee for debt recovery.
No I dont think you need to.
They didnt do any work. If they did they would know the exact amount!
Does that help?
That's fantastic - thank you!
Great. If I could ask you to rate my answer before you go today, the button should be at the bottom of the screen
If you need more help please click reply
I received this email from the debt collection company. I offered them £1 500 and feedback your advice they replied with this email. Are they correct with what they say?
Watson Hope & Co
Accounts & Debt Collectors
London N.W.3. 7HX
Tel: 0208(###) ###-####
Thank you for your without prejudice email. Its offer is rejected.
I do not dispute your input. It was essential in negotiations since the debtor disputed the invoice(s). Thank you for acknowledging that my effort is to be rewarded. The contract sets out what that reward is to be. It provides for 15% - so much better than the uncertainty of an estimate..It is a simple question of contract. It will not surprise you that I disagree with Counsel.
Accordingly I write this Letter before Action. It is designed to comply in substance with the Practice Direction for Pre-Action Conduct.
In accordance therewith it a) sets out the basis of the claim; b) advises you that the subject is not suitable for ADR; c) requests a response no later than
noon on Thursday next; and d) warns that failing reply I will just sue.
The Particulars of Claim will read:
The Claimant trades as a debt collector and contracted in writing to collect a debt originally in the sum of £29,996 for the Defendant.
It is a term of the contract that the Claimant is:
3. ........ entitled to charge and you agree to pay 15% on moneys (or moneys’-worth) received from or on behalf of your debtor(s) at any time after we have been instructed. The Claimant will rely on the contract for its full terms and effect.
In the event the debtor paid a lesser sum to the Defendant. The Claimant invoiced the Defendant on 19/1/15. Despite regular demand the Defendant a) refuses to say how much he received; and b) declines to pay 15% thereof AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS
15% of £29,996 or 15% of such lesser sum as was paid by the debtor, being £4,499 or less toegether with his entitlement under the Late Payment of Commercial Debt (Interest )Act 1998 to compensation £100 and interest, being £ ...... [tobe calculated].
Our standard letter adds:
You will also have to pay court issue costs. UNLESS you pay now to: Barclays 20-66-11 a/c Wise Watkins Hope & Co A/c No 00339105.
In your case however I am prepared to temper the wind and accept full payment in three tranches of £1,533 at monthly intervals. The first being made to our account on or before.Monday 23rd February
In addition to the above in accordance with the Civil Procedure Rules we are required to refer you to the Practice Direction particularly Para 4 concerning the Court’s powers to impose sanctions on parties for failing to comply with the Practice Direction. It can be found together with the Civil Procedure Rules on www.justice.gov.uk. Counsel will understand it all.
Please will you now share this with the board and I hope arrange the first payment.
Leslie M Wise
Last question, I received this email from Wise & Co. I offered him a without prejudice payment of £1 500 he want £4500. Its unlikely we are going to reach an agreement, therefore should I say he ought to take this matter to court. He is sticking to his point this is a contractual obligation...
______ Previous two emails_____
Dear Mr Honney,
I am not willing to detail emails, letters and phone calls to the NHS. All may perhaps be disclosed at trial, but until then, as presently advised I see no basis for your request. As I have tried to explain my reward is not based on effort What I did is, as I have regularly said, in terms of our contract irrelevant.
Of course I accept that I am entitled only to 15% of what you negotiated. I apologise for not having made that clear. When you let me know what you received I will accept 15% + late payment divided into three tranches.
I look forward to your reply within 7 days. If it helps I am prepared at this stage to waive all claims to interest for late payment.
leslie M Wise
On 12 Feb 2015, at 12:25, Lewis Honney wrote:
I will need to seek legal advice on your letter below and will advise you with their feedback. Considering we didn't secure the full amount I will have to reject your offer of £1,533 at x3 monthly intervals.
In the meantime can you detail exactly what you did to help us secure this debt please? As requested in my previous email. I was advised to ask you for this information. Therefore I will require to know how many emails you sent to the DOH. In addition please feedback how many telephone calls and letters were made to DOH. Can you also send me a copy of these letters please?
I will give you my reply within the next 7 days
I'm very sorry to bother you again regarding this matter, I received two emails from Wise & Co (See below). He isn't interested in my without prejudice offer and was wondering if I should suggest that he makes his claim via the county courts?
WITHOUT PREJUDICE SAVE AS TO COSTS
Dear Mr Honey,
I am back from abroad and had hoped to find waiting for me a reply stating the exact amount recovered. You will be aware there are no ambushes in civil litigation. It can be no secret.
This matter has been unduly protracted and the Letter Before Action having set out exactly the issues, unless there is good reason, I intend to issue proceedings on Tuesday.
Of course if I obtain judgment the whole sum will need to be paid "immediately" rather than in easy tranches.
Dear Mr Lewis,
Thank you for reminding me to remember the law. You will appreciate that I am a barrister. It seem so to me that you have not taken proper Advice. Years ago i heard Judge Leon opine that Advice was worth what you paid for it.
It is clear that either you did not give Counsel the full picture or failed to brief one at all.
You will have seen the Particulars of Claim. We are now arguing over the full entitlement. I am not particularly anxious to litigate and since i am abroad for a week I extend you that further time. The real question to ask Counsel is why he believes that the terms of the contract are not clear or need to be varied. Also perhaps why he introduces quantum meruit as a red herring. You might also ask whether these days a company, yours, will need to be represented by Counsel - an expense which is not generally recoverable in the Small Claims Court..
For my return i require to know how much you collected. I will calculate 15% thereof, and at this stage still the interest for late payment I may waive and also the compensatioin for late payment.
Leslie M Wise
On 17 Feb 2015, at 10:09, Lewis Honney wrote:
I have been advised accordingly, and have been told to remind you of the law. We strongly feel at stages of this process, you were more a hindrance than a benefit with securing this debt, furthermore you wasn't doing the work that was required hence the reason you asked me to actively take control on the situation.
Why would we have enlisted your help, if it meant we had to do the majority of work to secure the debt?
I'm prepared to offer you £1 500 for the partial work you did, however you are unsure to the final amount secured and wont demonstrate what work you actually did, therefore regrettably this matter may have to proceed to court.