Gladstones court papers

shush_ya_mush

My papers were served on 29th July 2016, when does my defence have to be in, can anyone enlighten me please?


Ive read through the forum and found this defence that someone used recently, it seems the closest to my circumstances, can I use this?




DEFENCE
1.The terms at the car park are not clear at all. The signs at the
car park are not legible or prominent. The defendant refers to the
Consumer Rights Act 2015 which supports a consumers position in
that the signage failed to make any obligation and/or risk of
penalty prominent.

2. A clear sign stating the terms and conditions at the entrance
to the car park is a specific requirement that the claimant is
required to follow. This was absent.

3. The claimant is put to proof that it has sufficient interest in
the land or that there are specific terms in its contract to bring
an action on its own behalf. As a third party agent, the
claimant may not pursue any charge. It follows therefore that if a
debt exists it is owed to the landowner not the claimant.

4. I have reasonable belief that the claimants intention was not
to offer a genuine contract to park and that the main purpose was
to deter to enforce a penalty.

5. The defendant neither admits or denies that he was the driver,
the claimant has failed to meet the conditions of The Protection
of Freedoms Act to pursue him as the registered keeper of the
vehicle.

6. Even if a contract had been formed it would be void due to the
claimant not acting in good faith.

7. The defendant disputes that the claimant has incurred £50
solicitors costs to prepare the claim. the defendant has
reasonable belief that Gladstone solicitor did not prepare the
claim and did not therefore charge the stated amount.

8. The defendant has the reasonable belief that the claimant is
abusing the court process by using the threat of action to alarm
the defendant into making a payment that is not owed.

9.The claimant has at no time provided an explanation how the sum
has been calculated , the conduct that gave rise to it or how the
amount has climbed from £100 to £150.

10. The claimant has not complied with the pre-court protocol. The
particulars of claim contain no detail and divulge no cause of
action. The defendant has no idea what the claim is about , why
the charge arose or what the alleged contract was . There is
nothing that provides a basis for understanding why the claimant
has asked the court to order the payment. The defendant invites
the court to use its case management powers to strike out the case
as having disclosed no cause of action.

11. If the claimant is intending to pursue this claim against the
defendant on the basis that the defendant is the registered keeper
then the claimant has failed to show that the conditions for
recovering the charge under Schedule 4 of the Protection of
Freedoms Act 2012 have been met.

12. No evidence has been provided to show a valid Notice to Driver
was given to the driver in accordance with paragraph 7 Schedule 4
of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Where a notice to driver
was given no evidence has been provided to show that a valid
notice to keeper was served in accordance with paragraph 8.

13. There is no evidence of any contravention at all.

I deny any liability for any sum being due at all to this claimant
and confirm that where stated facts are given within this defence,
I hereby confirm that they are true.

Redx

please read my signature , it will definitely help you if you get no replies from someone trained in legal matters (which the vast majority here are not, including me)

the answers to your "when does it have to be in" have been answered numerous times on here , please search for the info , but its somewhere between 28 and 33 days and the advice is get the defence in before day 30 , preferably sooner , because missing the deadline will cost you dear , assume 28 days from the date of service to be sure , or PHONE the court and ask

ps:- it was also answered in posts #14 and #15 !!!!!

The_Deep

Warn the solicitors.

parkingwoes_2

shush_ya_mush wrote: »

My papers were served on 29th July 2016, when does my defence have to be in, can anyone enlighten me please?

HO87 explained the timescales on his post on page 1.

Please clarify the ISSUE date on the claim form - is the the 29th July?
Are you confusing the SERVED date which is 5 days after issue date?

shush_ya_mush

Sorry Im out of my depth, I will re-read the post, but what do I warn the solicitor?

The_Deep

Warn the solicitor that, should his client, persist, HE (the client), could find himself paying YOU money for wasting YOUR time.


Google CPR27.14(2)(g) unreasonable behaviour.


Do not accord solicitors operating in this area any respect, they are practising at the very edges of the law. read this


https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5509488

shush_ya_mush

That was interesting reading, now I understand. Ive also worked out that my defence has to be in by August 31st.
Letter writing isn't my strong point, is there a template anywhere for a CPR27.14(2)(g) warning letter, I cant seem to find one.

The_Deep

There may be similar wording in one of Gan's letter . He posts here and on ppp.


I believe that Napier were awarded several hundred pounds when someone mucked them about.

shush_ya_mush

My deadling for filing a defence is looming, would someone mind telling me if this is ok to submit please?




DEFENCE
1.The terms at the car park do not for a contract, there is no contract offered so no cause for action by the plaintiff. The defendant refers to the
Consumer Rights Act 2015 which supports a consumers position in
that the signage failed to make any obligation and/or risk of
penalty prominent.

2. A clear sign stating the terms and conditions at the entrance
to the car park is a specific requirement that the claimant is
required to follow. This was absent therefore there was no contract to consider or breach so there is no cause for action by the plaintiff

3. The claimant is put to proof that it has sufficient interest in
the land or that there are specific terms in its contract to bring
an action on its own behalf. As a third party agent, the
claimant may not pursue any charge. It follows therefore that if a
debt exists it is owed to the landowner not the claimant.

4. I have reasonable belief that the claimants intention was not
to offer a genuine contract to park and that the main purpose was
to deter to enforce a penalty.

5. The defendant neither admits or denies that he was the driver,
the claimant has failed to meet the conditions of The Protection
of Freedoms Act to pursue her as the registered keeper of the
vehicle.

6. Even if a contract had been formed it would be void due to the
claimant not acting in good faith.

7. The defendant disputes that the claimant has incurred £50
solicitors costs to prepare the claim. The defendant has
reasonable belief that Gladstone solicitor did not prepare the
claim and did not therefore charge the stated amount.

8. The defendant has the reasonable belief that the claimant is
abusing the court process by using the threat of action to alarm
the defendant into making a payment that is not owed.

9. The claimant has at no time provided an explanation how the sum
has been calculated , the conduct that gave rise to it or how the
amount has climbed from £100 to £150.

10. The claimant has not complied with the pre-court protocol. The
particulars of claim contain no detail and divulge no cause of
action. The defendant has no idea what the claim is about , why
the charge arose or what the alleged contract was . There is
nothing that provides a basis for understanding why the claimant
has asked the court to order the payment. The defendant invites
the court to use its case management powers to strike out the case
as having disclosed no cause of action.

11. If the claimant is intending to pursue this claim against the
defendant on the basis that the defendant is the registered keeper
then the claimant has failed to show that the conditions for
recovering the charge under Schedule 4 of the Protection of
Freedoms Act 2012 have been met.

12. No evidence has been provided to show a valid Notice to Driver
was given to the driver in accordance with paragraph 7 Schedule 4
of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Where a notice to driver
was given no evidence has been provided to show that a valid
notice to keeper was served in accordance with paragraph 8.

13. There is no evidence of any contravention at all.

I deny any liability for any sum being due at all to this claimant
and confirm that where stated facts are given within this defence,
I hereby confirm that they are true.