CEL Claim Form - Defence

The_Ironist

Thanks. I've amended and checked I'm referencing the correct BPA CoP (Version 7 Effective January 2nd 2018)

I've amended these points slightly to more closely reflect my case (signage now removed as no charge car park)
:
9.1 The BPA CoP Section 13 requires the Claimant to allow two ‘grace periods’ – one reasonable period at the beginning of the parking period, and a minimum of 10 minutes at the end of the parking period.

9.2 The BPA CoP Section 18.2 requires the Claimant to have a standard form of entrance sign at the entrance to the car park, which must follow some minimum general principles. The Defendant has it on good authority that the signage was positioned as such that it could not be read by drivers as they enter the car park and puts the Claimant to strict proof. As such, the Claimant is in breach of the BPA CoP, and it is denied that the Claimant's signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract.

9.3 The BPA CoP Sections 18.3 and 18.4 require the Claimant to have signage stating the specific parking terms throughout the car park. The Defendant has it on good authority that the signage in place at the time of the alleged contravention was in breach of these requirements, and puts the Claimant to strict proof of the signage that was present.

9.4 The BPA CoP Section 21.1 requires the Claimant to have signs notifying drivers that ANPR camera technology is in use at the car park, and what the captured data will be used for. The Defendant has it on good authority that no such signs were in place at the time of the alleged contravention, and puts the Claimant to strict proof. As such, the Claimant is in breach of the BPA CoP.

The restrictions were not really new at my time of parking (being 4 years old)? Would this still apply?

Coupon-mad

The restrictions were not really new at my time of parking (being 4 years old)? Would this still apply?

No, sorry, misunderstood your first post.

The defence says what it needs to say, IMHO, although I would add another point:

It is worth noting, with reference to the arguments put forward in Parkingye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 (the Beavis case) that this notorious Claimant has been removed/had their contract ended and has no excuse or valid current interest in deterrence or parking management. Any letters sent to try to pursue this matter were viewed as baseless harassment and this claim is meritless, with the Beavis case fully distinguished. The unfair charge seems to be one of this Claimant's infamous 'revenge claims' for losing the contract, as they did in 2016 when they lost the Co-op contract altogether and started suing hundreds of Co-op staff and customers and it is understood the Co-op reached an out of court agreement, intended to prevent further action. This Claimant is put to strict proof to disclose to the court, the settlement or agreement and/or all correspondence with the Co-op about their record of claims, as it is the Defendant's position that this Claimant not only has no legitimate interest or commercial justification for continuing with any Co-op claims, but may well be barred from doing so.

P.S. I am guessing but deliberately putting CEL on the spot with that! We have no idea what did happen in the 2016 Co-op staff & customers cases but the claims suddenly disappeared, and all was silent, so we assumed an out of court settlement was reached to stop the actions. The point being, yours is a Co-op site too so it's fair to ask for evidence that they are not barred from this pursuit, re this Co-op site.

I hope they will discontinue for you, before the hearing, and not want a Judge asking these questions and being with you on that point!

The_Ironist

OOO I like that last addition but...

I did pick up with Co-Op CEO directly whose team confirmed that the car park was/is not owned by Co-op and that they have never had control over the management of it.

Car park was changed to CHP in July 18 and now has 2 hour free parking.

On this basis shall I not put that extra co-op bit in?

Co-op said they will donate £50 to me so hopefully get the ticket cleared and £50 off coop for the inconvenience.

Coupon-mad

I don't see the above as an issue. Use my paragraph anyway which might be enough to make CEL think twice about putting this before a Judge.

As a lay person you would have no idea that:

the car park was/is not owned by Co-op and that they have never had control over the management of it.

The_Ironist

Fantastic! Thanks for all the help!

Will keep my thread updated with progress.

The_Ironist

So after filing my defence. Got confirmation letter saying if not responded to within 28 days the claim would be stayed.

Had a letter through today titled 'Notice of Proposed Allocation to the Small Claims Track'. MCOL has updated to 'DQ filed by claimant'.

I've completed the Directions Questionnaire as guided and will post it tomorrow to both the address and claimants address.

Onto witness statement I guess? Is this pretty much the defence I filed?

Redx

the DQ can be emailed same as the defence

NO , the WS is not the same as the defence

the defence is composed of the legal arguments as to why you should win and the court and judge will see it after the local court has been allocated, no need for groundhog day

your WS is a story of the facts as you know them from start to finish, also commenting on the claimants POC and also their WS if it arrives

the WS may or may not contain legal arguments , its a story , written by you, with the facts as you know them to be, at the time and everything you have found out since

read other court case threads to see what their WS said and compare it to their defence

better research = a better outcome

Le_Kirk

Witness statements (WS) are written in the first person and tell the story of what happened on the day. You can use them to expand on your defence but you cannot introduce new arguments. You can use them to rubbish the WS of the PPC if/when you receive it. Check out the NEWBIE thread (really should be your bible now) for WS examples.

KeithP

As Redx says, email you completed DQ to the CCBC in the same way and to the same address that you sent your Defence. Refresh your memory on that by re-reading post #4 above.

The_Ironist

To update.

Got allocated a court date of 1st Oct.

CEL were meant to provide me and court with docs by Monday which they didn’t do. I notified the court of them failing to comply with 2 court orders yesterday.

Today I received a notice of discontinuance from CEL!

Thanks for your help all! Hopefully I won’t need it again!