Gladstones/SIP Court Claim

claxtome

Think you need to add at the beginning:

1.It is admitted that the Defendant was the authorised registered keeper of the vehicle in question at the time of the alleged incident.

Suggest adding in as a new 4:

The PayByPhone signage specifically states that there is “No need to display a ticket in your car” therefore there was no breach of any ‘relevant obligation’ or ‘relevant contract’ as required under Schedule 4 of POFA.

The current 4 I suggest rewording as follows forming a new 5:

5. Even if there was a contractual obligation to display a ticket it can not be complied with when using the Paybyphone app[STRIKE], as used by the defendant. The app, even when used directly as instructed at the parking site,[/STRIKE] as the app has no provision for printing a ticket.

And Combine the existing 5 and 6 to form a new 6:

On the material dates, the Defendant made all reasonable efforts to use the Paybyphone app, however due to a failure of the app, outside of the defendants control, the app did not take payment due to a buggy and unreliable user interface. The failure of the app was not made clear to the defendant.

New 7:

The contract formed was frustrated by the unexpected and uncommunicated failure of the Claimant's app, and it is trite law that no party can be held liable for breach to another under such circumstances of frustration of contract.

New 8:

It is denied that the Pay by Phone app, being indisputably an offer of a 'distance contract', complied with the The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013, which says:

''Confirmation of distance contracts: 16.—(1) In the case of a distance contract the trader must give the consumer confirmation of the contract on a durable medium.
(2) The confirmation must include all the information referred to in Schedule 2 unless the trader has already provided that information to the consumer on a durable medium prior to the conclusion of the distance contract.
(3) If the contract is for the supply of digital content not on a tangible medium and the consumer has given the consent and acknowledgment referred to in regulation 37(1)(a) and (b), the confirmation must include confirmation of the consent and acknowledgement.''

New 9:

It is believed SIP Parking Ltd are not the lawful occupier of the land and therefore the defendant has reasonable belief that they do not have the authority to issue charges on this land in their own name and that they have no rights to bring action regarding this claim

.
Then add the final bits:

In light of the foregoing, it is submitted that the Claimant has no cause of action, and has no evidence that the Defendant entered into any contractual terms,whether expressly, by conduct, or at all.

I believe that the facts contained in this Defence are true.

Signature

Date

Hope this helps

Coupon-mad

And here's one I wrote, you might want to grab parts of this?

Posters are welcome to use any of it, and it includes a generic (suitable for any defence) reference to a court's duty to consider unfairness, even of the price, if a term is not transparent:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/73663604#Comment_73663604

ParkerManc

Thanks folks, looks like i'm all set!


The only query I have is on the new number 9. I don't actually know if that's true as I haven't tried to find out?

claxtome

The only query I have is on the new number 9. I don't actually know if that's true as I haven't tried to find out?

Assuming you are talking about the new number 9 I suggested in post #12 I would say it is up to the Claimant to prove otherwise.

ParkerManc

Hi folks, Director's questionnaire came through today. I'll read up on how to fill it in.

ParkerManc

Ok so it's actually Gladstones directors questionnaire that I've been sent, do I wait for mine or do I have to send off for it?

claxtome

Ok so it's actually Gladstones directors questionnaire that I've been sent, do I wait for mine or do I have to send off for it?

You should get one sent OR if you prefer I believe you can download a form off the gov.uk website.
Try searching for Directions Questionnaire (N180) using Google

ParkerManc

Update to this. I sent off my directors form to the claimant and to the court, i've since been away and just returned to a letter from the court with this wording.....



It is recorded that.
1.A, This is a parking charges claim where the defendant admits being the driver but contends that the signage stated that a ticket need not be displayed(contrary to the contents of the PCN) a ticket could not be printed when paying using the parking 'app', a "buggy and unreliable user interface" prevented payment using the app, the defendant was in breach of the consumer contracts(Information, cancellation and additional charges) regulations 2013 reg 16 in failing to provide confirmation of the contract on a durable medium and the defendant has no authority to issue such charges.

B. The court considers this a claim that can be dealt with on paper, without a hearing, under CPR27.10 which requires the parties consent.

2.The claim is allocated to the small claims track
3.The claim is being reserved for the time being to District Judge Iyer
4.The parties must no later than 4.00pm on 7 March 2018 inform the court and their opponent whether they agree to the claim being dealt with on paper.
5.generic
6.generic
7.generic




So I have until tomorrow to inform what I'd like to do, I'm assuming my chances of winning are severely diminished by a paper hearing?

Lee1000

You should object and quote CPR 26.2A(3)

nosferatu1001

Indeed, definitely reject.
They seem to have gotten C and D the wrong way round as well