Letter of Claim from BW Legal

beamerguy

I think that will bring to the attention of the judge about the £60

On the subject of double recovery ... Gladstones solicitors also
try the £60 scam on. A case in Basingstoke on the 16th Jan
2019 ... "The judge laughed and said something along the lines. "It doesn't surprise me you don't want to pursue the additional £60 because it's not the first time we met and you already know I wouldn't allow this additional costs to be awarded".
SAME APPLIES TO BWLEGAL
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5869422/court-claim-northmapton-gladstones

Coupon-mad

I suggest you add the usual point about the fact they don't own the land/no standing.

tor140

HI, i've added 16 just to reinforce the double recovery point and 17-19 (bold) as suggested regarding land ownership. Is the defence getting a bit too 'long' or is there not really a limit?

As said previously, I'm on a bit of a back foot with regards to seeing the lease as the driver did not know the resident as it was a one off visit to pick something up. Will i get a chance to view the lease if it's submitted as evidence by the claimant or is there any other way i could request it? (have been denied copies so far).

KeithP

Won't the Land Registry supply a copy? At a price of course.

tor140

Hadn't realised you can 'buy' copies of anybody's lease, around £20, which is a bit annoying to have to pay out. I assume it would make the defence a lot stronger if I'm able to argue primacy of contract? Would this need to be at defence statement time or witness statement/evidence? Conscious that i need to get the defence in soon.

nosferatu1001

You HAVE to make the Argument in the defence, otherwise you cannot rasie it later
So you argue it in the defene, and include the relevant portions of the lease in the WItness statement-led bundle.

tor140

Morning, think I could do with some advise if anyone is able to help. I've paid for a copy of the lease and there is no mention to permit allocation but the part regarding visitor parking may well go against my defence.

"The right to allow visitors to park a private motor vehicle (but not any form of commercial vehicle or caravan or motor home) on a first come first serve basis for no longer than 24 hours on any Visitor Parking Space subject to any regulation"

The vehicle parked, although a private vehicle and not linked to any company use was a pick-up based vehicle albeit with a carpeted and covered bed. Would that still be classed as commercial vehicle in the eyes of the law?

Also the phrase 'subject to any regulation' does that mean the PPC would have authority or is there still a primacy of contract!

Starting to get a bit out of my depth now, any help would be really appreciated.

nosferatu1001

No, it was not a commercial vehicle. It weas not being used for business!
No
The PPC is a 3rd party and CANNOT enforce ANY terms of the lease
THe regulations still cannot alter teh right to peaceful enjoyment, and cannot REMOVE the right to park until some other condition is met - its too vague a term to have that power.

Youre not getting out of your depth
ITs just new
You will be safe "in depth" again by continuing to research, ask questions, and udnerstnad the claim against you - as you are doing.

tor140

Thanks nosferatu1001 I've added a section in (19) regarding Primacy of Contract. Is there any way to prove that it was a legitimate visitor whilst still denying to voluntarily name who the driver was?

nosferatu1001

Yes, the witness statement stating the person was a visitor, is evidence.
The claimant will not have anything to dispute that - no evidence. They do not know who drove, so a statement of truth verified SHOULD be accepted as fact. Rememeber that the court can still decide against you - ie they dont believe you - whcih is one reason we always say to be truthful here, because yrou credibility as a witness is critical.