Euro Car Parks : "County Court judgement SUBMITTED" sent by registered post

Coupon-mad

memphis73 wrote: »

The court have emailed me the particulars, as suggested.

"31 PARKING CHARGE NOTICES ISSUED AT JS BALHAMCAR PAK FROM 4TH JANUARY 2011 TO 5TH JANUARY 2012 . A SCHEDULE OF THESE NOTICES WILL BE FORWARDEDUNDER SEPARATE COVER TO DEFENDANT . ALL 31 PARING CHARGE NOTICES WERE ISSUED TO VEHICLE XXXXXXX OF WHICH DEFENDANT IS REGISTERED KEEPER . TOTAL OUTSATANDING £2590.00 I WILL PROVIDE THE DEFENDANT WITH SEPARATE DETAILED PARTICULARS WITHIN 14 DAYS AFTER SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM."

I am no expert with Small Claims but I would say there is no cause of action there. Are they alleging losses due to trespass or a contractual charge. It doesn't say - there is it seems nothing to support the claim - and neither situation is the responsibility of the registered keeper.

I am sure you should just ask the Court to strike it out, like in this case:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=68406

In that example it was struck out as the case should have been brought by the landowner if there was a loss (trespass). In your case - whether ECP eventually wake up and try to allege trespass or contract - you have the additional reason of 'wrong defendant' as the registered keeper cannot legally be held responsible.

You can trust 'give them FA' or 'AlexisV' to help you with your strike out application and if need be, a defence, by private message.

Keep it off the forum for a while I say. But please tell us what happens!

give_them_FA

Yes, the Particulars Of Claim don't appear to disclose any reasonable cause of action. However the procedure would be to defend; have the claim transferred to the OPs local court; and then make the application to strike out.

peter_the_piper

Legally, I wonder why they have not issued 31 cases (apart from cost) should not the court frown upon someone who waits for it to all add up?

taffy056

peter_the_piper wrote: »

Legally, I wonder why they have not issued 31 cases (apart from cost) should not the court frown upon someone who waits for it to all add up?

As already mentioned, they need to provide proof of who was the driver for each occasion, something I cannot see them being able to, also how can there be a loss in free car park ? And three of those invoices are for parking in a disabled bay, and they mentioned without a badge, obviously blue badges have no standing in private car parks.

OP can I ask again are you or any person in the vehicle at the time of parking disabled in any way? .

give_them_FA

peter_the_piper wrote: »

Legally, I wonder why they have not issued 31 cases (apart from cost) should not the court frown upon someone who waits for it to all add up?

They would say that in amongst the toilet paper there is a threat to take it to court for each individual ticket. I don't think they can be criticised for amalgamating them, quite the opposite- it might have been seen as an abuse to have started 31 separate cases. However, if none can be proved its all the same.

muckybutt

Taffy / Memphis pm to both of you, you need to act on asap.

give_them_FA

Would appreciate a copy-in, MB, as I am also working on this one.

muckybutt

give_them_FA wrote: »

Would appreciate a copy-in, MB, as I am also working on this one.

PM'd nowt in particular everyone just something I spotted.

memphis73

Thanks Muckybutt, I've taken the paperwork down for now, will repost further down the road.

give_them_FA

On the case, memphis, but one question, what do ECP put as the "grounds of claim" that is, the general heading of the claim? Breach of contract? Trespass? or just something like "unpaid parking tickets"?