Preparing a letter before claim

A letter before claim should explain the proposed case well enough for the recipient to respond meaningfully. The general pre-action practice direction expects information exchange and consideration of settlement before proceedings, subject to any applicable specialist protocol. ^[1]

State the debt and its basis clearly

Identify the parties, relevant agreement, key events and amount sought. Show the calculation, including credits and the basis of any interest. Refer to the documents that establish the obligation and attach the key material required by the relevant process.

Ask for a substantive response rather than only repeating a payment demand. Use a response period appropriate to the applicable protocol and circumstances, not a universal deadline copied from another dispute.

Prepare for the reply

Explain how payment, disagreement or a settlement proposal can be communicated. Keep proof of dispatch and the final letter with its enclosures. If the debtor raises a specific issue, investigate it before issuing a claim on an unchanged assumption.

Protocol selection matters particularly for debts owed by individuals. Settlement terms can turn a practical payment proposal into a clear agreement. Keep limitation under review because pre-action correspondence does not automatically stop time running.

Write around the obligation you say was broken A useful letter has a factual centre: who promised what, how that promise became binding, what happened and why payment or another remedy follows. Start with that sequence before describing the frustration caused by the dispute. If the claim concerns several transactions, explain whether they arise under one agreement or separate orders. The reader should be able to identify the particular obligation challenged without reconstructing months of correspondence or guessing which of several contract versions you intend to rely on.

Use precise descriptions of disagreements. Saying that a customer refused payment hides the question whether they deny ordering, challenge quality or say they have already paid. State the explanation received and why the available records do not resolve it in their favour. Where something remains unknown, request the information needed to assess it. The general pre-action framework encourages sufficient information exchange and a proportionate attempt to resolve the dispute; it does not make a longer or more threatening letter inherently better. ^[1]

Make the sum independently checkable Set out the principal amount in a way that another person can reproduce. For several invoices, an accompanying schedule can show references, due dates, payments and credits. Label disputed deductions without quietly removing them from the history. If interest is sought, identify its claimed basis and calculation period separately. Avoid combining professional fees, administrative charges and the contract price into one unexplained figure. Whether an additional charge is recoverable requires a basis beyond the fact that someone has incurred or invoiced it.

Check the arithmetic against source records immediately before sending. An invoice balance copied from an earlier demand may have become inaccurate after a recent transfer or credit. Record the date to which the account has been reconciled and explain how later payments should be identified. If the letter concerns a non-monetary remedy, describe the requested action clearly enough to assess compliance. A demand to resolve the matter gives little guidance where the actual issue is returning equipment, correcting a document or completing a defined task.

Attach evidence with a clear purpose Select documents that establish the agreement, alleged breach and requested remedy, subject to the requirements of the applicable protocol. Give each attachment a recognisable name and refer to the relevant document at the point where it matters. A recipient should not need to search an unlabelled archive for the accepted quotation. Preserve the wider file separately, including adverse material. A concise initial pack is an aid to understanding, not permission to conceal a relevant document or ignore a later disclosure obligation.

Check that attachments can actually be opened and that the recipient has the same version cited in the letter. A cloud link requiring your organisation's login may defeat the purpose of sending evidence. If sensitive third-party material appears in a document, obtain advice about appropriate handling rather than making unexplained edits to the original. Keep a final copy of the letter, the enclosure set and dispatch details together. These records answer the practical question of what the recipient was given an opportunity to consider.

Plan the decision after the response Assign responsibility for reviewing the reply before setting a timetable for escalation. The person reviewing it should be able to check new documents, correct an error and authorise a realistic discussion about resolution. If the response identifies a payment that was overlooked, update the balance and explain the correction. If it raises a substantial contractual issue, consider whether further advice or a focused exchange can narrow it. Automatically issuing the same claim regardless of the reply undermines the purpose of the letter.

Keep an internal note of the points agreed, the points still disputed and the information still missing. Review the appropriate next step against the cost and timing of proceedings, including any limitation concern. Separate a factual explanation intended to be relied on openly from any proposed settlement communication whose legal status needs advice. Adding a familiar heading does not determine confidentiality or privilege by itself. The aim is a record that supports an informed decision about the actual remaining dispute, rather than a threat left on autopilot.