Can someone clarify something for me please?

KeithP

Date of Service is usually stated as five days after Date of Issue.

Don't know why they have chosen to give a different Date of Service.
Maybe they realise thay didn't post it out as quickly as they should.

I suggest you stick with the dates I gave in post #60 above.

Do the AoS now - it's a simple procedural step - and then press on with creating your Defence.

You've had the Claim Form for over two weeks now - do not let this run away from you.

Hilee87

Thank you so much.
I know I have (work stress adding to this stress), I am dedicating this weekend and evenings next week to build the defense.

Will post it up as soon as I have something!

Hilee87

Hi again,

I seem to be struggling for inspiration for this defense. I'm not quite sure how to write it or even where to start building my argument.
I have read through some of the ones posted in the sticky thread and trying to eek out points that I can use, any help would be much appreciated.

Thanks

KeithP

You only have until Monday to do the Acknowledgement of Service.

Post #60 above tells you how to do that.

Don't overlook the AoS - it's only about ten minutes work - no thinking involved.

Coupon-mad

Hilee87 wrote: »

the permit couldn't be seen if standing at a certain angle

Just repeating the above to remind us what this UKPC fake PCN is about.

We have concise defence examples for you, in the 2nd post of the NEWBIES thread. Look what a good job one of many posters with a meritless claim made, when pointed to the templates:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5930505/uk-cpm-and-gladstones-strike-again

Not the first version, the one in post #12 there. All they did was adapted bargepole's concise template from the NEWBIES thread.

The OP was like you, then was pointed to the right place in the NEWBIES tread & hey presto, their defence is a good one and almost done. Not that this is the only stage!

But reading that little thread is not a shortcut to avoid you actually reading the 2nd post of the NEWBIES thread at each stage of this process.

You - and any poster with any PPC claim - can easily compile a defence by using bargepole's concise defence example from the NEWBIES thread. Just add your words about the facts - look back at how Solicitor LoadsofChildren123 put it in her earlier reply to you at LBC stage, and adapt that style, putting it all in the third person: ''The Defendant's case is that the permit was displayed and there to be seen...'' etc.

You will be surprised how easy it becomes when you start with the basic template by bargepole and only have to fill in one 'the facts are' point.

Hilee87

Hi Guys,
So I've been looking through the threads you guys have suggested. I have drafted my defense so far below... Feels a little light, however I figure my main argument is that the pictures have been taken on purpose to obscure the permit...
Anywho, I'd be grateful for any input...

1. The Defendant was the registered keeper of vehicle registration number XXXXXXX on the material date. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.

2. The facts of the matter are that the Defendant was an employee at XXXXXXX, and was issued and continued to hold a valid parking permit for the car park for the duration of employment at XXXXX. The aforementioned permit was displayed at all times.

2. The Defendant's case is that the permit was displayed and there to be seen and the allegation is based on images taken by a Parking Attendant alleging that there was no valid parking permit displayed. These are merely images of the vehicle taken from a point where the parking permit was obstructed from view. The Defendant claims that the photos taken by the parking permit were taken from a deliberate angle as to obstruct/hide the permit from view.

3. Due to the sparseness of the particulars, it is unclear as to what legal basis the claim is brought, whether for breach of contract, contractual liability, or trespass. However, it is denied that the Defendant, or any driver of the vehicle, entered into any contractual agreement with the Claimant, whether express, implied, or by conduct.

4. The Claimant, or their legal representative, has added an additional sum of £60 to the original £100 parking charge, for which no explanation or justification has been provided. Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act, at 4(5), states that the maximum sum which can be recovered is that specified in the Notice to Keeper, which is £100 in this instance. It is submitted that this is an attempt at double recovery by the Claimant, which the Court should not uphold, even in the event that Judgment for Claimant is awarded. Furthermore, the Defendant submits that the legal representatives cost have not actually been incurred by the Claimant. The two letters sent are templates used as part of their mass litigation model in an attempt to circumvent the court costs rules using double recovery.

In summary, it is the Defendant's position that the claim discloses no cause of action, is without merit, and has no real prospect of success. Accordingly, the Court is invited to strike out the claim of its own initiative, using its case management powers pursuant to CPR 3.4.

Millie260506

I can’t find newbies thread I’m on a smart phone?

Hilee87

Any thoughts on my above post folks?

Umkomaas

Millie260506 wrote: »

I can’t find newbies thread I’m on a smart phone?

Hilee87 wrote: »

Any thoughts on my above post folks?

Yes, try using a PC or laptop. Mobile phones are pretty much useless in utilising this forum.

Hilee87

Sorry guys, I meant my defense draft.

Ideally I'd like to get it sent off before the weekend.

Any input greatly appreciated