VCS Vs Defendant- Albert Street car park

Madaschi

Ok, thanks. I think this is the time I should send my defence. It is to my best ability (as a non native). I believe there is nothing more I can do for now.

Snakes_Belly

There is a recent case whereby the claimant inflated the claim and the claim was dismissed.

You could state in your defence that the Claimant has inflated the claim by £60.00 in respect of a debt collection fee that has not been paid. This is abuse of process.

Snakes_Belly

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5868812/this-needs-greater-exposure&highlight=abuse+of+process

Snakes_Belly

It sounds as if you need to get your defence sent. You will be able to develop certain points further in the witness statement.

Madaschi

Thanks Snakes Belly! Just a last minute consultation and I am off to send it. Should I delete 19 then?

18.Alternatively, even if there was a contract, the claim is based on an alleged contractual parking charge of £100. The Claimant has inflated the claim by £60.00 in respect of a debt collection fee that has not been paid. It is an abuse of process for the Claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to recover as it is a cost to the business, therefore, can not be reclaimed twice. This inflation of the considered amount is a gross abuse of process.

19.Further and alternatively, the provision requiring payment of £185.00 is unenforceable as an unfair term contrary to the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

Snakes_Belly

In 18 I would say that it is not a cost to the business. Not sure about 19

Madaschi

Thank you. I have deleted that part. 19 remains in place.

18.Alternatively, even if there was a contract, the claim is based on an alleged contractual parking charge of £100. The Claimant has inflated the claim by £60.00 in respect of a debt collection fee that has not been paid. The Claimant issued a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to. This inflation of the considered amount is a gross abuse of process.

19. Further and alternatively, the provision requiring payment of £185.00 is unenforceable as an unfair term contrary to the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

Madaschi

All done.

Thank you, everyone, for your help with my defence.

Now it is the time to prepare witness statement. Will start working on this as from tomorrow.

Have a great day all!

Umkomaas

Have you sent off your defence? Your WS will come much later in the process; the defence should not be held up for the WS.

Madaschi

Umkomaas wrote: »

Have you sent off your defence? Your WS will come much later in the process; the defence should not be held up for the WS.

Yes, Umkomaas, I have. Already have received acknowledgement.