Hearing end of the Month

jackmarak

I wasn't aware an additional document could be added at this stage.

So to clarify. The court can be emailed again (although the witness statement has been sent already) and it can be requested some additional information be taken into account?

Then the liquidation papers could be sent along with a cover letter requesting this be added and explaining this is public knowledge and has only come to light now because the defendant only knew at the witness statement stage?

Would that be allowed?

jackmarak

Cut off date is tomorrow for documents to be sent to the court.
An email has been sent to ask if it would be possible to send additional information.

KeithP

No idea why you sent an email asking permission to send more info.

As nosferatu1001 said:

You could serve them now. Why delay

System

The court can be emailed again (although the witness statement has been sent already)

Yes. You do a Skeleton Argument which can be served 3 days before. The Skeleton is just a point by point explanation of why their case fails and relates to the facts presented in the WS.

Or you can send a "drop hands offer" plus your costs plus the additional evidence and ask them to drop it.

Courts at this level are flexible and all the judge wants to do is to come to the "correct" decision. You are entitled to question their evidence with new facts that have come to light in order to "help the court". The fact you've sent it to ESP prior shows you are not hijacking but narrowing the issues which is the Small Claims' overriding objective.

jackmarak

Cheers for the info.
Additional information will be put together tonight.

Coupon-mad

Not if you include it with a SA.

Who advised this? What were they on?

It should also be noted that the defendant has been advised not to use that argument for the following reason:

The contract was never legal to begin with therefore;
The defendant would be trying to prove something that doesn't need proving.

jackmarak

On another forum.
The exact comment:

"No need to, the tenants have no right to contract with them as they aren't the land owner nor did he convey his responsibilities to them. Even if still trading that contract is with the wrong party and as such worthless."

I understand what this person is saying however I was thinking surely it would only strengthen the defendant argument. Now everyone on here is saying it should be added as additional information. It will be.

Coupon-mad

That seems like fanciful rubbish. Tenants can make contracts with parking firms.

jackmarak

IPC Code states they have to have permission from the landowner or the tenant has to show they have an agreement with the landowner to be able to make such arrangements. The landlord has produced a signed statement that explains that the tenant had no authority to enforce parking restrictions on his land. There has been no tenancy agreement/ document presented at all from the C to show that the tenant can act on behalf of the landowner.

System

IPC Code states ....

Don't get hung up on what the IPC code says. The judge will only be interested in the facts .. then apply the law as it stands. The issue is whether the company granting the licence to ESP existed and you say it did not at the time of parking. That is the core issue - not what a "code" says about it.