Claim form received

KeithP

I rarely comment on the content of Defences or Witness Statements

I don't feel comfortable doing so and it would be wrong of me to mislead anyone.

V.Annoyedlady

Okay. Well thanks for getting back to me the both of you. I was only asking for advice on it because I was sure that I had seen comments after others defences were posted giving advice on wording, what to delete, etc. I just want to be confident that what I'm doing will help my girlfriend out, thats all.

Le_Kirk

3. As the PCN was issued almost 6 months ago the defendant cannot ascertain who was the driver on the day in question and the defendant states that she loans out her car to friends on occasions.

Possibly better as: -

3. As the PCN was issued almost 6 months ago the defendant cannot ascertain who was the driver on the day in question and the defendant states that the car is loaned out to friends on occasions.

Keeps it third person.

You might want to add another point, which was copied from Bargepole's concise defences in the NEWBIE sticky: -

11. In summary, the Claimant's particulars disclose no legal basis for the sum claimed, and the Court is invited to dismiss the claim in its entirety.

IANAL but use common sense and I have compared your defence to others I have read. If you have read all of Bargepole's defences in post # 2 of the NEWBIE sticky and your defence counters all the claims in the claimants POC in a similar style, then I believe you would be told you are good to go.

V.Annoyedlady

Thank you Le-Kirk. I'm very grateful for your support.

Coupon-mad

V.Annoyedlady wrote: »

Good afternoon all,


Here we go again. I've had another look at some of Bargepole's defence examples and completed this. Any comments or suggestions very welcome. I need to try and get this defence finished by tomorrow at the latest.Thanks once again for all your help.


Claim no XXXXXXXX


Between:


Premier Parking Solutions Ltd


-And-


XXXXXXXX (Defendant)


DEFENCE

1. The defendant denies that the claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.
2. The facts are that the vehicle XXXXXX , of which the defendant is the registered keeper was parked within the XXXXXXXX car park with a valid ticket.
3. As the PCN was issued almost 6 months ago the defendant cannot ascertain who was the driver on the day in question and the defendant states that she loans out her car to friends on occasions.
4. The Claim states that the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver of the vehicle XXXXXXX on the day in question. These assumptions indicate that the Claimant has failed to identify a Cause of Action and is simply offering a menu of choices. As such the claim fails to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4 or with Civil Practice Direction 16 Paragraphs 7.3 to 7.5.
5. The Claim states that the legal basis is brought against the Defendant for an ''overstay of parking period'' and is a breech of terms of parking. It is denied that the Defendant, or any driver of the vehicle entered into any contractural agreement with the Claimant, whether express, implied or by conduct. The breech referred to by the Claimant is reliant upon their own data being wrong from the outset as the ANPR data of VRN's and Ticket Machine Log data captured are not validated with each other automatically or manually concludes that either the system or business model or both are unfit for purpose.
6. It is also disputed that the Claimants signage erected with the car park is of a large enough font and displayed adequately for patrons to read thoroughly. The signage is also not lit adequately and is quite dirty. The terms and conditions on the signage are not set out in a sufficiently clear manner that would be enable any reasonable person reading them to be bound to any form of contract. The £100 penalty charge is not highlighted in large enough font to be immediately noticable. Some additional signage is positioned over six feet from the ground making it very difficult to read them.
7. Neither the claimant nor BW Legal have been forthcoming with information as to the periods of grace at the site in question.. It has been noted that the claimant has a BPA membership logo on the car park signs when in fact they are not a current member. The IPC, of which the claimant is a member state that grace periods should cover the period before and after parking. The IPC does not state what these times should be, even as a minimum. As the claimant has not stated on the car park signs anywhere what the grace period times are then the defendant is challenging the legality of the PCN.
8. The Claimant is put to strict proof of full compliance that it has sufficient proprietary interest in the land under the correct address or that it has the necessary authorisation from the landowner (WPD Property Investments Ltd) to issue parking charge notices and to pursue payment by means of litigation.
9. 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 ''Contractural costs''. Without an invoice to prove this the Defendant believes this is an attempt at double recovery.
10. In summary, the Defendant believes that the Claimant has not formed a contract with the Defendant, has no way to conclusively prove that the parking overstay actually occurred and that the Claim has no basis with which to bring the defendant to court. The Defendant requests that the court denies payment of any amount to the Claimant and that the Defendants costs are paid for by the Claimant.

I believe that the facts contained in this defence are true.

Just seen this and it looks fine. Stick around and be ready for DQ stage.

KeithP

V.Annoyedlady, don't lose sight of the fact that your Defence needs to be filed before 4pm today.

Refer again to post #5 above if you need to.

V.Annoyedlady

Thank you guys for your replies. I haven't been on here for a while. The defence was filed in time and I have now received the Directions Questionnaire from BW Legal.

Redx

so wait for your DQ from the CCBC and then fill that in, as mentioned in the NEWBIES thread


the B W form is trying to trick you

V.Annoyedlady

Yes, I'm just looking at that now. My girlfriend is a bit anxious about all of this and has asked me if she needs to attend the court hearing, if and when a date is set. Does she HAVE to attend or can I do that on her behalf?

Redx

if anyone is actually attending, then SHE must attend, even if you go with her and help her , a no show is an automatic loss unless she has told them she isnt attending and agrees to it being done on papers only

she can decide to not attend and inform the court a couple of weeks before the hearing, asking for it to be done on papers only