CEL Court Claim - Assistance please

Coupon-mad

Yes I would add that you already have a parking contract that you pay for, as part of the agreement between xxxx school and the Lido. CEL are not party to that contract so cannot vary it, and cannot re-offer parking (on more onerous terms and at a three figure punitive cost) when in fact, you have already paid for parking and are granted rights with the landowner's consent.

State too, that you have primacy of contract and what CEL are attempting is 'derogation from grant'.

Coupon-mad

Just to add, don't attach evidence yet. A defence is just one document at this early stage:

Please see supporting document in attachment from the Manager of Wycombe Rye Lido.

Refer to the fact you have it, and will produce it with your Witness Statement and at any hearing.

AlliK

Thanks Coupon-m ... your advice is very much appreciated :T

[Deleted User]

Personally, I would run a far more straightforward Defence. This is fact specific and the boilerplate terms are irrelevant. CEL are presumably retained to enforce by the Lido - the very organisation to whom the Defendant, AlliK pays a parking fee. There is no breach of contract. I'd go with something like this....

1. It is admitted that at all material times the Defendant was the owner of a [colour] [make] vehicle variously with registration marks [XYZ1] and [ABC1] as permitted by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority ("the DVLA")

2. It is neither admitted nor denied that to which the Claimant are permitted to undertake parking enforcement. The Claimant is put to strict proof.

3. It is admitted that the Defendant parked his/her vehicle on [date] whilst using the swimming pool at the Wycombe Rye Lido ("the Lido"). The premises are operated by Fusion Lifestyle (Charity Number 1107737) ("Fusion") with whom the Defendant contracts for sports related activities and the provision of parking whilst using those services. The Defendant denies any separate contract with the Claimant in respect of parking arrangements.

4. It is not admitted that the Claimant has contractual or other lawful authority to bring proceedings against the Defendant. The Claimant is put to strict proof. Further, and in the alternative, the Defendant avers that the Claimant requires the permission of Fusion or the owner of the relevant land, if different, to commence proceedings.

5. The Defendant pays a monthly charge of £ XXX to Fusion to use their facilities and, in particular, to be able to park his vehicle. The Defendant has continued to pay his monthly charges for parking and at the date of the alleged parking infringement had paid for parking. In the premises, it is denied that there was any breach of contract or of parking terms. The Claimant's claim is wholly misconceived.

6. The Defendant is required to keep his vehicle details up to date with Fusion, who bear responsibility for maintaining a central database of vehicle registrations. On [date] the Defendant informed Fusion that he would be transferring his personal registration [XYZ1] to a conventional registration to prepare the vehicle for sale. This was permitted by the DVLA on notice to them and the Defendant advised Fusion of the change to registration [ABC1].

6. Unbeknownst to the Defendant, Fusion failed to update their database. The Defendant therefore received a parking charge notice on [date].

7. Fusion have taken responsibility for the aforementioned error, which has been communicated to the Claimant in writing. Notwithstanding all pre-action efforts to cancel the parking charge notice (to include correspondence from Fusion requesting the same), the debt collection agents appointed by the Claimant failed to respond to correspondence. The Claimant unilaterally issued court proceedings without preparing a Letter of Claim.

8. The Defendant avers that the Claimant has issued proceedings inappropriately, prematurely and without complying with the practice directions on pre-action conduct.

9. The Defendant avers that the Claimant's claim has no reasonable prospect of success. The Defendant intends to serve Notice of Contribution pursuant to CPR Part 20.6 in the event that the claim proceeds by way of indemnification by Fusion for their admitted error.

STATEMENT OF TRUTH
The Defendant believes that the facts set out in the Defence are true.

[Deleted User]

whoops. My numbering went awry, but you get the picture.

AlliK

WOW! I'm blown away with everyone's help - awesome & huge thanks :T

AlliK

I do not actually use the sports facilities - my child's school has an agreement with the Lido that we can pay an annual fee to park, so I'll have to change aspects of this as I don't want to say anything that's untrue...

Coupon-mad

Change it to suit then, but that defence will see off CEL I am sure.

AlliK

I do have a question on item 7... the part in brackets re. Fusion (to include correspondence from Fusion requesting the same)...
I am assuming that this doesn't mean I submit the Fusion supporting letter with the defence? But would use it should this matter go further.
Fusion have not provided the letter directly to CEL but just to me for use as defence.
Apologies if it's a daft question!!

Coupon-mad

Not a daft question. Evidence is for later, if a hearing date was allocated (unlikely to proceed that far).

You don't submit anything at this stage except the defence, signed & dated and emailed to the CCBC.