IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including QR codes, number plates and reference numbers.
HX Car Park Management, Gladstones Letter Before Claim
Comments
-
"(2). The particulars of claim do not meet the requirements of Practice Direction 16 7.5 as!
there is nothing which specifies how the terms were breached. Indeed the particulars
of claim are not clear and concise as is required by CPR 16.4 1(a). [Strike]The Claimants are
known to be serial issuers of generic claims similar to this one. HM Courts Service!
have identified over 1000 similar sparse claims. I believe the term for such behaviour
is roboclaims and as such is against the public interest.[/strike]
^ This para is virtually the same as your defence para 4. Amalgamate the 20 -
Remove this. The claimant is not the landowner and suffers no loss whatsoever as a result of a!
vehicle parking at the location in question0 -
"On the basis of the above, [strike]we[/strike] request the court!"
Go with "I" or "the defendant"0 -
Make this more concisePractice Direction 3A which references Civil Procedure Rule 3.4 illustrates this point:!
1.4 The following are examples of cases where the court may conclude that particulars of!
claim (whether contained in a claim form or filed separately) fall within rule 3.4(2)(a):
1. those which set out no facts indicating what the claim is about, for example ‘Money!
owed £5000’,
2. those which are incoherent and make no sense,
3. those which contain a coherent set of facts but those facts, even if true, do not
disclose any legally recognisable claim against the defendant
On the basis of the above, we request the court strike out the claim for want of a
cause of action.!
" Due to the woefully inept particulars of claim which are sparse, vague and incoherent. The defence requests the claim is struck out as disclosing no cause of action pursuant to CPR 3.4 and PD 3A0 -
0
-
Of course not. Your defence must be signed, as the form tells you. Print, sign, scan to PDF.0
-
OP - do you require further review of your defence or have you sent it?0
-
I've sent it, signed and scanned. Is it still wroth ringing the court on Monday?
Really appreciate the help, thank you.0 -
Take it it's the MCOL number and not the CCBC number?0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards