Court Claim. BW Legal on behalf of Excel Parking

Lamilad

Thanks Coupon-mad. I have amalgamated paragraphs 2 and 9, so 2 now reads as below. I wondered if it's worth making a brief reference to "no reasonable presumption". I've put something below but am more than happy to remove it if you think it's best 'kept up my sleeve' for now. I'm also not sure it's enitirely relevant as BW haven't replied to my part 18 and so have not actually said how they are asserting that the keeper is liable. What do you think?

[FONT=&quot]1. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]The Protection of Freedom Act 2012 Schedule 4 has not being complied with. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]a) [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Notwithstanding that the Claimant claims no right to pursue the Defendant as the registered keeper under PoFA, the Claimant has failed to meet the conditions of the Act and has never acquired any right to pursue the Defendant in this capacity if it cannot identify the driver. [/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]b) [/FONT][FONT=&quot]The keeper can only be held liable if the Claimant has fully complied with the strict requirements including 'adequate notice' of £100 charge and prescribed Notice to Keeper letters in time and with mandatory wording[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]c) [/FONT][FONT=&quot]The claimant has no right to assert that the defendant is liable based on ‘reasonable assumption’. PATAS and POPLA Lead Adjudicator and barrister, Henry Michael Greenslade, clarified that with regards to keeper liability, "There is no ‘reasonable presumption’ in law that the registered keeper of a vehicle is the driver and operators should never suggest anything of the sort"(2015).[/FONT]

Coupon-mad

That looks fine to me.

Lamilad

Coupon-mad wrote: »

That looks fine to me.

Ok thanks. I'll submit tonight. I understand the next bit will be a questionaire from the court, then my full defence and witness statement. Is there anything else I need to be aware of? I'll keep reading other threads especially the small claims bit in newbies (want to know this inside out). Anyone know where I can get Prankster's court guide? Can't seem to buy it through his website or ebay

I'm still hoping it doesn't end up in court and they just drop it but I'm not holding my breath.

Umkomaas

Anyone know where I can get Prankster's court guide? Can't seem to buy it through his website or ebay

Amazon (download).

https://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_1_18?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=parking+prankster+guide&sprefix=Parking+prankster+%2Caps%2C173

Lamilad

After reading another thread I've changed all instances of the word "landowner" in my defence to "landholder" except for where I'm talking about part 18 as, in my email, I used "landowner" Just want to check I've done the right thing?

Also where my defence talks about part 18 I've referred to GPEOL (as I did in the part 18 I sent). I understand any mention of GPEOL is a big 'no no' so should I remove/reword or is it ok as it's only mentioned in relation to part 18?

Submitting defence in a few hours so responses much appreciated. thanks

Coupon-mad

I would not have GPEOL in your defence. Doesn't matter that it featured in Part 18 questions.

Lamilad

Coupon-mad wrote: »

I would not have GPEOL in your defence. Doesn't matter that it featured in Part 18 questions.

Thanks, I've removed it. Final question before I submit (sorry just want to make sure I get everything right)... Re para. 6 (below) Should I remove this as there is a 10 minute grace period at the site - not that it's long enough to read the very wordy, detailed signs - but I don't want to give them anything that they can easily argue in their favour?

"[FONT=&quot]6. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]No sum payable to this Claimant was accepted nor even known about by any driver; as they were not given a fair opportunity to discover the onerous terms by which they would later be bound."
[/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]

timbo29_2

Hi
I'm in a similar situation and was interested in how you got on?
Tim

Lamilad

timbo29 wrote: »

Hi
I'm in a similar situation and was interested in how you got on?
Tim

Hi, Do you mean, how have I got on with submitting my defence?

Lamilad

FAO anyone who is reading my thread, doing their own research. I noticed the following while submitting my defence via MCOL:
* Your defence statement is limited to 122 lines - I had to edit mine a little and remove spaces between paragraphs to make it fit.
* You cannot use < > or ". I had to replace " with '
* I included a statement of truth and signature in my statement but MCOL makes you tick boxes to the same effect so maybe these are only needed for postal defences.
* If you submit you defence after 4pm it wont be received until the next day so be careful if submitting on the deadline day.