BW Legal Particulars of Claim incorrect

Pf23

Advice needed please

Received a Claim Form dated 4 July 2019 from BW Legal on behalf of Britannia. Have already done AOS. Need an initial steer on if/how to frame a Defence as the main point of their Particulars of Claim is demonstrably not true (leaving aside all the spurious contractual and legal costs BWLegal are trying to add).

Facts
Keeper (me) received an NTK PCN in late Dec 2017 from Britannia regarding an alleged ANPR-detected parking event earlier that month. The NTK was delivered to me by Royal Mail one day after the 14 day relevant period allowed by POFA (I have an independent witness to this and the franked envelope from BP showing that, even though the NTK was dated earlier within the 14 day period, it was only actually posted by 2nd class post on the penultimate day of the relevant period so it could never feasibly have arrived in the period envisaged by POFA in the absence of any other evidence (which I have anyway)). No driver has ever been identified up to this point. Hence I had thought, if it ever got this far, to base a Defence mainly on the fact there is no legal keeper liability for a contract per POFA due to NTK being given to Keeper outside of the relevant period (regardless of when BP say it was issued) and the other usual Defence content.

However, the Particulars of Claim are now given as:

"The Claimant's Claim is for the sum of […] being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant in respect of a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) issued on [date of alleged parking event in early Dec 17] (Issue Date) at [time] at [location].
The PCN relates to [keeper's vehicle make and reg].
The terms of the PCN allowed the Defendant 28 days from Issue Date to pay the PCN, but the Defendant failed to do so.
Despite demand having been made, the Defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability.
[more stuff about s69 interest and contractual costs "pursuant to PCN Terms and Conditions."]"

Claimant's Legal Representative has then signed off that the facts stated in the claim form are true.


My initial dilemma is therefore that the main PoC "fact" on the Claim Form is demonstrably not true - no PCN was ever issued on the date/time/location given. No such document exists. Britannia and BW Legal have only ever referenced the NTK PCN & I have BP's SAR outcomes from my response to the LbC to confirm this too - there is only the NTK which was issued almost 2 weeks after the alleged parking event and received after the end of the POFA relevant period.

So might I be better just going for this non-existent PoC PCN in my initial Defence (and save the rest for WS/Skeleton Argument if ever needed) or should I go for both this and the rest of the above NTK, etc. in the Defence now?

Or is there another route to bring this false statement to the court's attention?

Coupon-mad

Put everything in your defence now. You can only expand on points in the defence.

My initial dilemma is therefore that the main PoC "fact" on the Claim Form is demonstrably not true - no PCN was ever issued on the date/time/location given. No such document exists.

OK, good, mention that.

You haven't said whether this was a POFA-worded NTK or Britannia's old version that had NOTHING to say the keeper would be liable. They changed the wording in 2017 sometime. So, check yours against para 9 (specifically 9(2)f) and see if there is a warning about the recipient of the NTK becoming liable after a certain period.

Apart from that point, you will need all the usual stuff. A poster has just posted a fine example of a generic defence on this forum tonight, based on all our current resources.

I just replied on it, so it will be easy for you to find right now.

You can use the same generic defence and add your 'facts' into para #2.

KeithP

Pf23 wrote: »

Received a Claim Form dated 4 July 2019 from BW Legal on behalf of Britannia. Have already done AOS.

With a Claim Issue Date of 4th July, and having done the Acknowledgement of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Tuesday 6th August 2019 to file your Defence.

That's four weeks away. Loads of time to produce a perfect Defence, but please don't leave it to the last minute.


When you are happy with the content, your Defence should be filed via email as suggested here:

Print your Defence.
1. Sign it and date it.
   
2. Scan the signed document back in and save it as a pdf.
   
3. Send that pdf as an email attachment to CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk
   
4. Just put the claim number and the word Defence in the email title, and in the body of the email something like 'Please find my Defence attached'.
   
5. Log into MCOL after a few days to see if the Claim is marked "defence received". If not chase the CCBC until it is.
   
6. Do not be surprised to receive an early copy of the Claimant's Directions Questionnaire, they are just trying to keep you under pressure.
   
7. Wait for your DQ from the CCBC, or download one from the internet, and then re-read post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread to find out exactly what to do with it.

Pf23

Found that recently posted / commented generic defence - thanks for the tip.

Will form my own defence using my salient facts in para 2 in line with the timescales also just commented.

😀

Coupon-mad

Easy when you know how! Should take less than half an hour IMHO.

Pf23

"You haven't said whether this was a POFA-worded NTK or Britannia's old version that had NOTHING to say the keeper would be liable. They changed the wording in 2017 sometime. So, check yours against para 9 (specifically 9(2)f) and see if there is a warning about the recipient of the NTK becoming liable after a certain period."

Yeah - it's their POFA-worded NTK and has that bit about it being subject to them complying with the applicable conditions in Schedule 4, which they demonstrably haven't!

Pf23

Amusingly have today received BW Legal's "we've
just sent you a county court claim but please contact us to arrange a payment plan to avoid a CCJ..." letter. Unbelievable chancers! :mad:

The_Deep

Nine out of ten of these so called breaches of contract are scams sso get your MP on board.

Parliament is well aware of the MO of these private parking companies, and on 15th March 2019 a Bill was enacted to curb the excesses of these shysters. Codes of Practice are being drawn up, an independent appeals service will be set up, and access to the DVLA's date base more rigorously policed, and persistent offenders denied access. Hopefully life will become impossible for the worst of these scammers.

Until this is done you should still complain to your MP, citing the new legislation.

beamerguy

Pf23 wrote: »

Amusingly have today received BW Legal's "we've
just sent you a county court claim but please contact us to arrange a payment plan to avoid a CCJ..." letter. Unbelievable chancers! :mad:

Chancers YES, They have to win first in court and if you did not pay you would get a CCJ.
Low level legals, that's the problem

Tell me, how much is the claim for, is there mention of £60

Pf23

Amusing update. After having filed a full Defence and comprehensive Witness Statement & evidence bundle, BWLegal discontinued their claim without filing any further evidence. I popped in an Application to the Court for my fully itemised £200+ costs and, in advance of that being heard next month, have just received "urgent" letter & emails from BW Legal offering to settle out of court without prejudice for just under that figure....

Coupon-mad

Haha, so you mean a hearing has been set to hear your costs application?  Did you pay a fee for that, BTW?