Court Claim Help needed.

iamsamrat1

Does this seem like a defence I should submit or should I add anything else ?

Umkomaas

7) The Claimant’s solicitors are known to be a serial issuer of generic claims similar to this one, with no due diligence, no scrutiny of details nor even checking for a true cause of action. HMCS have identified over 1000 similar poorly produced claims and the solicitor's conduct in many of these cases is believed to be the subject of an investigation by the SRA.

That’s a rant. It has no relevance to whether the PPC Claim is justified or not.

How is the SRA’s investigation of the solicitors progressing?

You haven’t told us which parking company is involved here - who they are can give us (and then you) an idea of how this might progress.

Coupon-mad

The defence needs to say near the start, some background such as what sort of car park it is and what the Defendant knows happened (even if not the driver).

If you haven't told us which PPC it is, then how can we be sure this is non POFA?

iamsamrat1

Ok so i need to take out the rant about the relevance of the claim.... the parking firm is euro parking services if that helps?

Redx

I suggest you also follow the example defences by member BARGEPOLE

for example , they have a header which yours does not, plus the footer (statement of truth) is completely different as well

you wont find better examples than his layouts , so if I had a court claim I would be ensuring I had those headers and footers in my defence, but with the correct claimant details depending on who issued it

that way , only the actual CONTENT would matter, which I would then be concentrating on

iamsamrat1

I have not yet Formatted the defence It was the content I was asking for feedback on. The information in the Defence is from Defences I have read in the Examples by Bargepole and/or legal beagles and picked appropriate paragraphs that I thought were applicable to my case. It is the terminology and the laws I am unsure about.

Coupon-mad

We've had a number of Gladstones Euro claim defence threads on here, so search the forum for those keywords and read some outcomes. I think we won another one v Euro this month.

I also think they probably DID comply with the POFA in their NTK wording, so read some more defences about Euro cases and see how others worded their defences in recent months. Where a PPC has complied with the POFA, there is no advantage in not saying who was driving, if it was the Defendant, as you will see in other cases.

iamsamrat1

ok thanks I will have another look and update the defence, I appreciate the help.

Coupon-mad

1shaz1234 is writing their one at the moment v Euro so there is duplication here today for us again and all cases are similar. Please come off your own thread and do some reading of others, to learn more about what to include and how to argue it.

iamsamrat1

I Apologise there has been a duplication, I believe you think I have not been researching the matter but I assure you I have spent endless amounts of time reading other peoples threads I read 1shaz1234 Defence already and adapted mine as the comments have been coming in, and will keep an eye on the feedback she gets and adapt accordingly
thanks again