Claim Form Originating from bwlegal and Britannia parking

avem1

Brilliant guys, thankyou!!

Castle

So which company issued the claim, since "Britannia Parking" is just a trading name and not a legal entity?

avem1

The Claimant is 'Britannia Parking Limited"

Castle

avem1 wrote: »

The Claimant is 'Britannia Parking Limited"

Is there a Company registration number on any correspondence because, according to Companies House the company is dormant, and has never traded.
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/03175808

avem1

On the 2018 contract the number on that contract is 08182990 and comes up as Britannia Parking Group Limited.
But yes, as you say the Claimant 'Britannia Parking Limited' (03175808) is showing as dormant.

The PCN received in final quarter of 2016 is headed 'Britannia Parking' and under this it says 'Britannia parking group Registered in England No. 08182990

All the subsequent correspondence I've had from them, at the bottom says: "Britannia Parking is a registered trading name of Britannia Parking Group Limited and any of its wholly owned subsidiaries. Registered office: Britannia House, 16 Poole Hill, Bournemouth, BH2 5PS
Registered in England No. 08182990

Thoroughly confused now!

avem1

Does this mean the contract with the Landowner from 2016 is not worth the paper its written on?
If thats the case, any direction as to how to phrase this in my defence would be appreciated.

Coupon-mad

Just state what you see, and show us your wording and we'll add to it and edit someone stronger in, if we think it is needed.

avem1

thanks coupon, will do. But just to be sure I know what I'm arguing before I put anything down....

The fact that the footer on the 2016 contract gives the business number for a company that was in administration when the contract was signed, does that make it void or is this just seen as an administrative error (ie they used an old piece of paper, when they may have relisted as another company with a similar name)? Many thanks

avem1

Herewith my latest draft defence. Its as posted before with the main differences/changes coming in section 5.2. I'd be grateful for any comments from the pros:


In The County Court
Claim No: XXXXXXX
Between
XXXXX (Claimant)

-and-

XXXXXXX (Defendant)

____________
DEFENCE
____________

1. The Defendant was the registered keeper and driver 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 there were no visible signs stating the claimants terms from entering the car park area to where the defendant parked.
On the foot route the defendant made from their parked car to XXXX (shop) and back, there were no signs.
This is in contravention of The British Parking Association (BPA) Approved Operator Scheme (AoS) section 18.3 under which the claimant is an active member.

3. The claimant has one sign positioned to the left of a pavement on a private access road prior to entering the main car park area. It is denied that the claimant's sign sets out the terms in a sufficiently clear or visible manner which would be capable of binding any reasonable person reading them. It would also be unsafe to attempt to read this sign whilst negotiating two concurrent roundabouts in a busy traffic and pedestrian area. This sign is positioned so that any passing pedestrians would completely obscure it from view. It is, therefore, denied that the Claimant's sign is capable of creating a legally binding contract.
This sign is in contravention of the BPA AoS Appendix B.

4. 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 entered into any contractual agreement with the Claimant, whether express, implied, or by conduct.

5. The Claimant is put to strict proof that it has sufficient proprietary 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.

5.1 The signage states that "Britannia Parking manage and control this car park". Britannia Parking 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.
Neither the claim form, nor the signage state who the owner of the land is.

5.2 The Claimant has provided the defendant with a redacted ‘contract’ they have with the landowner dated 15 Jan 2016. This contract is Signed by Bryan Parker, “Managing director, Britannia Parking Group Limited” and is referenced as registered company 2389707. There are numerous irregularities with this contract:
1. Registered company 2389707 is actually registered at companies house as “Car Park 2015
Limited” whom went in to administration on 8 April 2015.
2. On the 1 April 2015 Mr Brian Parker had a Termination of appointment as Director with Car
Park 2015 Ltd.
3. The contract does not give express authority for the claimant to issue claims in their own name.
4. The contract makes reference to an ongoing agreement dated 2 February 2009. I suspect this
agreement is also in the name of Car Park 2015 Ltd, who is not the claimant in this case.

For the reasons above I believe the claimant has no standing to make a claim.

6. The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant has artificially inflated the claim value by claiming to have paid vague costs (contractual costs) totaling £XX in addition to an alleged £70 debt.
Previous letters to the defendant from BW Legal have stated that the £XX claimed is for “our client's initial legal costs".
Legal services cannot be claimed in the small claims court as per CPR 27.14

6.1 The claim includes a sum of £XX, described as "Legal representative's costs". This work is done as part of the Claimant's Legal Representatives 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.

6.2 The Defendant puts the Claimant to strict proof that all claimed costs were invoiced and paid. The defendant also asks why they waited nearly 2 years to bring this to court and why they believe their own negligence and delay should earn a Claimant 8% interest, to the imbalance of a consumer's rights and interests

7. The defendant denies the claim in its entirety voiding any liability to the claimant for all amounts claimed due to the aforementioned reasons. The Court is invited to dismiss the Claim and to allow such defendant's costs as are permissible under Civil Procedure Rule 27.14


I believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true.

Name
Signature
Date

avem1

I guess I should add that car park 2015 ltd were dissolved on 22 june 2016