BW Legal County Court Defence

colloq

Perfect, I'll get on with finishing off the defence. Thanks for confirming what font style, size etc. I want to do everything to get the Judges on my side.

Just checking, is that an email attachment to the Courts, or to BW Legal/Excel?

What's the key points to input, in regards to the Pre Oct 2012 when it changed from Driver to Registered keeper, as I think that's my main part of winning, as I don't even recall who was driving almost 6 years ago, let alone I can't see them with evidence showing who "was seen leaving the car park"

Coupon-mad

The defence goes to the ccbcaq email address shown in the CCBC's contact us page. Not to the Claimant, but EVERYTHING after this, does also go to the claimant.

Read bargepole's summary of what happens when, it's linked in the NEWBIES thread post #2.

Re the fact it's pre-POFA, you just say (at this early stage, where you don't submit any evidence yet) it's pre-POFA therefore there is no lawful possibility of 'keeper liability'.

colloq

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Re the fact it's pre-POFA, you just say (at this early stage, where you don't submit any evidence yet) it's pre-POFA therefore there is no lawful possibility of 'keeper liability'.

Thanks for your help its really appreciated, just checking, I was under the impression that as the court papers have been served, within 28 days I had to provide a full defence?

Am i getting confused and this is different to evidence? Sorry, first time i've ever had to deal with anything like this, so would I simply put a defence in of;

This case is pre-POFA therefore there is no lawful possibility of 'keeper liability' unless the claimant can provide proof otherwise

Redx

yes you do have to put in a full defence , even if it was just the PRE pofa argument

evidence is put in much closer to the court date

you really NEED to study the BARGEPOLE post closely, where he tells you what happens and when

the initial defence is the ONLY defence you can send in , unless you paid a lot of money to change it further on (which should be avoided)

so make sure the final defence is the BEST defence you can submit, then its printed , signed and dated , scanned back to pdf and emailed as an attachment to the ccbc email address , before the 28 days is up

Coupon-mad

This case is pre-POFA therefore there is no lawful possibility of 'keeper liability'. [STRIKE]unless the claimant can provide proof otherwise[/STRIKE]

Yes you put in a full defence, but with no attachments, no photos, no case law transcripts (yet).

colloq

Quentin wrote: »

Ask them to resend the original LBCCA you don't recall receiving which should show you the details of the "debt"

How is it best to get them to re-send this LBCCA?

The Issue date on the CCBC forms was 8th January. Am I right in presuming the 28 days will give until 5th February to Submit the Defence statement? This would actually take the date of submission of the defence over the 6 years since the claim was issued.

Would this adjust my defence, or does the 6yr element get suspended from the date the CCBC forms were issued on the 8th Jan?

Coupon-mad

Request a SAR (Google it) and that shows you all letters and all info held about you/the car. Send the SAR request to the parking firm direct, separately.

The Issue date on the CCBC forms was 8th January. Am I right in presuming the 28 days will give until 5th February to Submit the Defence statement?

Plus 5 days for service, MAX 33 days!

does the 6yr element get suspended from the date the CCBC forms were issued on the 8th Jan?

Yes, but mention it in the defence of course. It's unreasonable to wait almost six years to issue a claim against a keeper who can't be held liable in law, and to add six years' worth of interest on!

Include it all, show us your draft.

colloq

An inital defence letter as below. This will be prepared as a .pdf file and sent directly via email to the CCCB correct? It also has above it the file number, and the defence and claimant details as set out in the Newbies thread;

---

1. The Particulars of Claim do not state a clear cause of action. The Claimant has given no indication of the nature of the alleged contravention in the Particulars of Claim.

1.1 I therefore request the court to strike out the claim using their court management powers, for disclosing no cause of action or for the court to order further & better particulars of claim and leave for the defendant to amend their defence.

2. This case is pre-POFA therefore there is no lawful possibility of 'keeper liability'. I defend as registered keeper. After 6 years, I am not able to say who was driving the car at the time in question. Assumptions cannot be made, particularly as this claimant is well known for citing the totally inappropriate criminal case of Elliott v Loake to infer the driver

2.1 It's unreasonable to wait almost six years to issue a claim against a keeper who can't be held liable pre-POFA.

2.2 To wait this long to proceed with a claim to then add six years worth of interest on is unfair.

3. No Letter Before Claim was served to show any evidence of the PCN or what breach occurred.

4. The signage was inadequate to form a contract with the motorist. The claim is for breach of contract, however it is denied that any contract existed due to the inadequate signage.

4.1 The elements of offer, acceptance and consideration both ways have therefore not been satisfied and so no contract can exist.

5. The Claimant has no standing to bring a case.

6. Neither the claim form, nor the signage state who the owner of the land is.

6.1 The signage states that "Excel Parking Services LTD manage and control this car park". Excel Parking Services LTD are therefore acting as an agent of the landowner. As an agent, the Claimant has no legal right to bring such a claim in their name. Any claim should be in the name of the landowner.

6.2 If Excel Parking Services LTD deny acting as an agent, they are put to strict proof by disclosing the appropriate parts of their contract with the landowner.

7. The Particulars of Claim state that "The Claimant also claims £54.00 contractual costs pursuant to the PCN Terms and Conditions".

7.1 Previous letters to the defendant from BW Legal have stated that the £54.00 claimed is "for our client's initial legal fees".

7.2 Legal services cannot be claimed in the small claims court as per CPR 27.14

8. This case can be distinguished from ParkingEye v Beavis (2015) UKSC 67 (The Beavis case) which was dependent upon an undenied contract, formed by unusually prominent signage which formed a clear offer and which turned on unique facts regarding the location and the interests of the landowner. Mr Beavis was the driver who saw the signs and entered into a contract to pay £85 after exceeding a license to park fee. None of this applies in this case.

9. The claim includes a sum of £50, described as "Legal representative's costs". This work is done as part of the Claimant's everyday routine and no "expert services" are involved. The Claimant is put to strict proof, by way of timesheets or otherwise, to show how this cost has been incurred.

I believe the facts contained in this Defence Statement are true

---

Below this is named, dated and signed.

I will also be sending a separate request into Excel / BW Legal in regards to a SAR to find out exactly what the PCN was served for and what evidence, letters they hold.

Coupon-mad

Looks very good, nice and concise. Email a signed/dated copy to the ccbcaq email address.

colloq

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Looks very good, nice and concise. Email a signed/dated copy to the ccbcaq email address.

Would there be anything you'd change / add before I fire it off in the morning :T