County court business centre

Loadsofchildren123

So standing right in front of the signs you still can't read them?

Coupon-mad

Even though you had previous PCNs alerting you to the t&cs?

Remove this waffle entirely:

2. This Claimant has not complied with pre-court protocol (as outlined in the new Pre Action Protocol for Debt Claims, 1 October 2017). As an example as to why this prevents a full defense being filed at this time, a parking charge can be for trespass, breach of contract or a contractual charge. All these are treated differently in law and require a different defence. The wording of any contract will naturally be a key element in this matter, and a copy of the alleged contract has never been provided to the Defendant.
a. This is a speculative serial litigant, issuing a large number of “draft particulars”. The badly mail-merged documents contain very little information

except for

The Claim Form Particulars were extremely sparse and divulged no cause of action nor sufficient detail.

...which then becomes your point 2.

You also still have a ton of POPLA appeal type wording in #3 and none of the paragraphs are numbered under it. The point about unclear signs is far too long and I couldn't see that you used the words I ave you about denying a contract:

- it is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle mentioned in the claim

- it is denied that any contract was formed or agreed to pay a parking charge, and it is denied that there are any contractual signs at all or line markings on the road on the left hand side, where it is admitted that the car was briefly stopped (say why it was stopped - loading something? Or parked because the D believed it was unrestricted?).

- Even if some signage elsewhere at this site is produced by the Claimant in evidence, any terms are buried in wordy small print, inadequate, illegible and unlit, and fails to offer any licence to park. So there can be no contract, absent any consideration and agreement flowing between the parties. If it was a matter of trespass - which is denied - that is a matter of tort, only for the landowner to pursue and cannot be dressed up as if there was a contractual offer to park at a price in a place where the Claimant appears to be saying such conduct is in fact prohibited.

etc.

My version also admitted you were the driver, as I think you said this was already admitted?

torzie_lee

No i didnt admit i was driving as on the date in question i do no know who was driving. It starts with
"
- it is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle mentioned in the claim.

Then point 3 starts with denying the contact and what you advised

" It is denied that any contract was formed or agreed to pay a parking charge on the site in question, where it is admitted that the car was briefly parked, as the signs in this car park are not prominent, clear or legible from all parking spaces and there is insufficient notice of the sum of the parking charge itself, so for the driver parking shows as unrestricted. "

torzie_lee

I have now removed point 2 apart from the sentence you advised to leave in. Thank you for all of your help.

Coupon-mad

i didnt admit i was driving as on the date in question i do no know who was driving.

Then you need to state that in defence at the top:

1. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle mentioned in the claim, but the driver is not known. It is too long ago for the Defendant to be certain, and nor is there any obligation upon a registered keeper to name a driver to a private company, regarding an alleged contractual event on private land.

1.1. The Claimant has provided no evidence of the driver and is put to strict proof of such evidence, or that they have fully complied with the 'keeper liability' provisions of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4 (the 'POFA'). The Defendant denies liability, in the honest belief that the Claimant failed the requirements for 'adequate notice' of the penalty parking charge, and there was an absence of a relevant contract and/or relevant obligation, and/or that the Notice to Keeper was not served or worded in accordance with the mandatory, prescripted wording in the POFA.

I would remove all of this which can go into your Witness Statement, later, but it's far too wordy for a defence:

In the car park in question, the signs are sporadically placed, indeed obscured and hidden in some areas. They are unremarkable, not immediately obvious as parking terms and the wording is mostly illegible, being crowded and cluttered with a lack of white space as a background. It is indisputable that placing letters too close together in order to fit more information into a smaller space can drastically reduce the legibility of a sign, especially one which must be read BEFORE the action of parking and leaving the car.

Areas of this site are unsigned and there are no full terms displayed - i.e. with the sum of the parking charge itself in large lettering – or at the entrance, so it cannot be assumed that a driver drove past and could read a legible sign, nor parked near one. There are no signs to the right of the car park itself and there is no sign on exit towards MacDonald’s restaurant. The signs are not lit and in poor weather conditions, this would reduce visibility further. Visibility on the date in question would have been reduced due to storm Georgina with winds up to 90MPH and rain battering the UK.

So, a letter height of just half an inch, showing the terms and the 'charge' and placed high on a wall or pole or buried in far too crowded small print, is woefully inadequate in an outdoor car park. Given that letters look smaller when high up on a wall or pole, as the angle renders the words less readable due to the perspective and height, you would have to stand right in front of it and still need a stepladder (and perhaps a torch and/or magnifying glass) to be able to read the terms.

torzie_lee

All done. Lets see what they come back with. seriously though if you saw the signs at the site in question you would laugh! have a good night x

torzie_lee

I have received a notice of proposed allocation, is this the direct questionnaire i am expecting? I have checked newbies thread that adv to fill it in but i cant seem to find anything that states to fill in paper copy or online. Thank you x

torzie_lee

Hi guys so i have received the court allocation and date. So i am now getting my witness statement together. It states in the letter there is a £25 fee, do i need to pay that before the court date?

KeithP

torzie_lee wrote: »

Hi guys so i have received the court allocation and date. So i am now getting my witness statement together. It states in the letter there is a £25 fee, do i need to pay that before the court date?

Please read it again... carefully.

Doesn't it also say that it is the Claimant to pay that fee?

Coupon-mad

torzie_lee wrote: »

Hi guys so i have received the court allocation and date. So i am now getting my witness statement together. It states in the letter there is a £25 fee, do i need to pay that before the court date?

The Claimant will LOVE it if you pay their court fee!

:rotfl: