Court Claim by BW Legal

inasanalias

So after looking through the forum and on the newbies thread I think this is what I am thinking of going with. I know its a bit of a copy and paste but its what I have had in mind and its been put down really well.

In the county court

Claim no:XXXXXXX

Between

Parking Awareness Services (claimant)

-AND-

XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX (defendant)

1. The defendant 4 denies that the claimant is entitled to relief in sum claimed, or at all

2. It is admitted that the defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in question at the time of the alleged incident.

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. Further and in the alternative, it is denied that the claimant's signage sets out the terms in a sufficiently clear manner which would be capable of binding any reasonable person reading them. They merely state that vehicles must be parked correctly within their allocated parking bay, giving no definition of the term 'correctly parked', nor indicating which bays are allocated to whom.

5. The terms on the Claimant's signage are also displayed in a font which is too small to be read from a passing vehicle, and is in such a position that anyone attempting to read the tiny font would be unable to do so easily. It is, therefore, denied that the Claimant's signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract.

6. The Claimant is put to strict proof that it has sufficient prorpietary interest in the land, or that it has the necessary authorisation from the landowner to issue parking charge notices, and to pursue payment by means of litigation.

7. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4, at Section 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper, in this case £100. The claim includes an additional £60, for which no calculation or explanation is given, and which appears to be an attempt at double recovery.


8. 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.

I believe the facts contained in this Defence are true.

Name
Signature
Date

onlyfoolsandparking

inasanalias wrote: »

So after looking through the forum and on the newbies thread I think this is what I am thinking of going with. I know its a bit of a copy and paste but its what I have had in mind and its been put down really well.

In the county court

Claim no:XXXXXXX

Between

Parking Awareness Services (claimant)

-AND-

XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX (defendant)

1. The defendant 4 denies that the claimant is entitled to relief in sum claimed, or at all

2. It is admitted that the defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in question at the time of the alleged incident.

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. Further and in the alternative, it is denied that the claimant's signage sets out the terms in a sufficiently clear manner which would be capable of binding any reasonable person reading them. They merely state that vehicles must be parked correctly within their allocated parking bay, giving no definition of the term 'correctly parked', nor indicating which bays are allocated to whom.

5. The terms on the Claimant's signage are also displayed in a font which is too small to be read from a passing vehicle, and is in such a position that anyone attempting to read the tiny font would be unable to do so easily. It is, therefore, denied that the Claimant's signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract.

6. The Claimant is put to strict proof that it has sufficient prorpietary interest in the land, or that it has the necessary authorisation from the landowner to issue parking charge notices, and to pursue payment by means of litigation.

7. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4, at Section 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper, in this case £100. The claim includes an additional £60, for which no calculation or explanation is given, and which appears to be an attempt at double recovery.


8. 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.

I believe the facts contained in this Defence are true.

Name
Signature
Date

Its a good start, you have at least posted a defence which the more experienced posters will now critique for you and probably add/take away paragraphs so you end up with a well crafted defence which you can then send in.


Keep reading and keep up the good work, your doing well.

KeithP

Is paragraph 7 entirely relevant?

You admit to being the driver in para 2.

The last sentence of para 7 is ok, but I am struggling to understand how POFA wording about the maximum that a keeper can be charged affects an admitted driver.

inasanalias

Thanks KeithP, in your opinion should I take out paragraph 7 then but leave in the last sentance?

inasanalias

Good morning, am going to send my defence in today, anyone else want to critique it before I do so, thanks in advanced

KeithP

You have another two weeks before your Defence is due.

Why not wait a few more days for others to comment?

inasanalias

Ok will do, thanks

inasanalias

Good evening, just a update, so I sent my defence in for both my parking tickets and on Monday I received a letter from the court to acknowledge that they have received one of the letters but for some reason I haven’t received a letter of acknowledgment for the other! I sent it by recorded delivery and they were both signed for so I’m a bit confused. I have tried ringing the court but no one ever answers!

inasanalias

Sorry again, I just looked up the tracking number again and for some reason one was delivered and signed for on the 26th and the other delivered and signed for on the 29th even though I sent them together!!! Bit strange but I hope it hasn’t been received after the allowed time for my defence to be submitted!!

Coupon-mad

Why did you waste money on recorded delivery, when the advice on every defence thread is to email the defence? Would have been free, and immediate, almost.

Now you will have to chase it and phone the CCBC on Monday morning to make sure.