BW Legal Letter of Claim

Coupon-mad

jackyboyw wrote: »

No, definitely over stayed by a long time.

Wembley Lidl Car park in you know the one.

You dumped the car in a retail park all day and went offsite? Is that right?

Why is that OK?

jackyboyw

Because I was young and stupid, had parking tickets before but nothing ever happened so I thought I'd leave it all day and see what happens.

jackyboyw

I honestly don't know what to put in this defence, looked through all the examples and there's nothing I can use.

Redx

If you think anyone here will write it for you you are sadly mistaken

Start with the concise defence by bargepole
Add no landowner authority
Add the Abuse of process paragraphs by coupon mad posted in the thread by beamerguy
Ensure the inadequate signage is queried
Address the POC from the claim form too

Then renumber all paragraphs , giving each one its own number

That is a basic defence

Redx

jackyboyw wrote: »

I don't really know what to put in this because I WAS parked in the BAY for over 8 hours lol. What do I say?

No you weren't

You were elsewhere

Your vehicle was parked in a bay for that period

Parking companies monitor vehicles , not People

jackyboyw

Correct but how does that help?

Redx

It doesn't help at all apart from teaching you basic English which is required for your court case , where a judge will see it , instead of some of the gibberish being written in this thread

Frankly , there is no Defence based on what happened , the driver is liable for parking without permission for longer than allowed on somebody else's property

So like Beckham , you would have to win on a technicality , he was speeding , no question , but the NIP arrived one day late , cost him thousands to employ Mr loophole to find that nugget that got him off that charge , but he still got done for mobile phone use whilst driving later on. I assume he has now learned not to flout the rules , or accept the consequences

So your defence is based on legal arguments and hope one of them wins , like Beckham , because none of what you have said will win

You should have paid the initial PCN as the cost for Parking for 8 hours , you chose to ignore it , which is your choice , but sometimes you need to take the lumps if you have done wrong

It will be a miracle if you win this , but we don't trade in miracles , we leave that to the clergy

I detailed your defence in post #45 above

jackyboyw

Okay thanks for the help

I've done a defence, please let me know your thoughts.

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, registration XXXX, of which the Defendant is the registered keeper, was parked on the material date in a marked bay allocated to Company UK Parking Patrol at Wembley Park Drive, and had a valid permit to be parked in that bay.

3. The Particulars of Claim state that the Defendant ….. the registered keeper and/or the driver of the vehicle. These assertions 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, paras. 7.3 to 7.5. Further, the particulars of the claim do not meet the requirements of Practice Direction 16 7.5 as there is nothing which specifies how the terms were breached.

4. Due to the sparseness of the particulars, it is unclear as to what legal basis the claim is brought, whether for breach of contract, contractual liability, or trespass. However, it is denied that the Defendant, or any driver of the vehicle, entered into any contractual agreement with the Claimant, whether express, implied, or by conduct.

5. Further and in the alternative, it is denied that the claimant's signage sets out the terms in a sufficiently clear manner which would be capable of binding any reasonable person reading them. They merely state that vehicles must be parked correctly within their allocated parking bay, giving no definition of the term 'correctly parked', nor indicating which bays are allocated to whom.

6. The terms on the Claimant's signage are also displayed in a font which is too small to be read from a passing vehicle, and is in such a position that anyone attempting to read the tiny font would be unable to do so easily. It is, therefore, denied that the Claimant's signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract.

7. The Claimant is put to strict proof that it has sufficient proprietary interest in the land, or that it has the necessary authorization from the landowner to issue parking charge notices, and to pursue payment by means of litigation.
7.1. It is averred that the landowner contract, if there is one that was in existence at the material time, is likely to define and provide that the Claimant can issue 'parking charge notices' (or CNs) to cars - following the procedure set out in paragraph 8 of the POFA - or alternatively, postal PCNs where there was no opportunity to serve a CN (e.g. in non-manned ANPR camera car parks, and as set out in paragraph 9 of the POFA). The Claimant is put to strict proof of its authority to issue hybrid non-CNs, which are neither one thing nor the other, and create no certainty of contract or charge whatsoever.

8. 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 which no calculation or explanation is given, and which appears to be an attempt at double recovery. *(Do I need to find the original charge)*

9. In summary, it is the Defendant's position that the claim discloses no cause of action, is without merit, and has no real prospect of success. Accordingly, the Court is invited to strike out the claim of its own initiative, using its case management powers pursuant to CPR 3.4.


I believe the facts contained in this Defence are true.

Name
Signature
Date

jackyboyw

Anything further I need to add? Can you also add a link to the Abuse of process paragraphs please? Appreciated.

beamerguy

jackyboyw wrote: »

Anything further I need to add? Can you also add a link to the Abuse of process paragraphs please? Appreciated.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6014081/abuse-of-process-district-judge-tells-bwlegal