Evri/Packlink Parcel non delivery, PAPLOC now Evri Court Claim issued.

[AndyOrch]

Having discussed this point already with Bankfodder with regards to the pluses and negatives of rejecting mediation in this type of relatively low-cost small claims track claims, it is an expectation that both parties will consider ADR mediation from the court's stance obviously as to free up court time and expense in hope that the claim can be settled without further involvement of the judicial system and it also shows that you are amicable and open to settling the matter.

 

Opting for mediation does in no way weaken your claim or position or risk the amount claimed and expense of that claim but allows the defendant the opportunity to settle without further costs to themselves. You will always have the final say on whether you accept their offer or whether to reject it and proceed to allocation /trial so in reality its irrelevant if you have opted to participate in mediation and simply becomes a tick box exercise.

 

Settling the matter at mediation will save you further costs with regards to a hearing fee and also safeguard you should you lose at trial and have to face their potential costs in defending the claim.

 

Now to the negatives yes it allows the defendant to defend the claims without being tested at trial and yes it stops the judgments being recorded and used in further legislation to prove that their business model is unfair to consumers. County Court Judgments are not precedent's and will not be considered in determining judgments at County Court level but can be useful in leverage in future higher litigation.

 

From a CPR (Civil Procedure Rules) stance 

 

Proportionality

4. A pre-action protocol or this Practice Direction must not be used by a party as a tactical device to secure an unfair advantage over another party. Only reasonable and proportionate steps should be taken by the parties to identify, narrow and resolve the legal, factual or expert issues.

5. The costs incurred in complying with a pre-action protocol or this Practice Direction should be proportionate (CPR 44.3(5)). Where parties incur disproportionate costs in complying with any pre-action protocol or this Practice Direction, those costs will not be recoverable as part of the costs of the proceedings.

11. If proceedings are issued, the parties may be required by the court to provide evidence that ADR has been considered. A party’s silence in response to an invitation to participate or a refusal to participate in ADR might be considered unreasonable by the court and could lead to the court ordering that party to pay additional court costs.

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/pd_pre-action_conduct

 

 

.