Need strong defense for county court claim

Authordj

Hi,

Gladstones have issued a claim against me stating I was in breach of car park rules stipulated on signs of Euro Parking Services Limited. The car park spaces were for permit holders only.

I've looked through the forums but nowhere really states what's a good defence. In my case two main signs on posts have been hit by cars and knocked out the ground. Both signs have been removed and not replaced. I will get photos of where the signs are missing and a video while driving into car park to show no clear signs visible.

Is this a strong enough defense to win? Is there anything else I can use for defense?

Thanks in advance

Redx

Nobody here will tell you the odds for a win, that is for a court to determine

Nobody here will write the defence for you either ( there is no s in defence)

Post the issue date from the top right of the claim form below

Email a SAR to the DPO at EPS and get all your documents and pictures and data about you and your vehicle

Do the AOS online on the government gateway website to give you more time to compile one

No Landowner authority and poor signage will be 2 key defence points, plus the abuse of process paragraphs by coupon mad posted in the thread by beamerguy

Post the draft defence below for critique

Authordj

Thank you Redx for your reply.

The issue date is 23/07/2019.
I'm in the process of emailing for SAR and I have already done the AOS Government Gateway on 29/07/2019

I will post a draft defence ASAP

Authordj

Also I am no longer the registered keeper the car has been scrapped so I do not have a V5 document

Umkomaas

Authordj wrote: »

Also I am no longer the registered keeper the car has been scrapped so I do not have a V5 document

In terms of the court claim, you were the RK of the vehicle at the time of the infringement, that is the relevant point. You still have to defend the claim.

If you are referencing the fact that a copy of the V5C is needed as proof of identity to support the SAR request, send a copy of the court claim letter instead.

Authordj

Yes it was for SAR. Thank you

The_Deep

Nine times out of ten these tickets are scams so complain to your MP.

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, persistent offenders denied access to the DVLA database and unable to operate.

Hopefully life will become impossible for the worst of these scammers, but until this is done you should still complain to your MP, citing the new legislation.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/enacted

Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these Private Parking Companies.

KeithP

Authordj wrote: »

The issue date is 23/07/2019.
I have already done the AOS Government Gateway on 29/07/2019

With a Claim Issue Date of 23rd July, and having done the Acknowledgement of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Tuesday 27th August 2019 to file your Defence.

That's nearly 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.

Post #2 of the NEWBIES sticky thread - link to that thread above - offers guidance on how to write a winning Defence and there a several examples linked from there.

Authordj

So I've looked at many defences and this is the one I will be using as it suits my case perfect. All I need to know is if it's up to date. I'll be filling in my details shortly and only adding two points that the signage is also badly deteriorated and some missing completely. Which I have photo evidence for.


IN THE COUNTY COURT

CLAIM No: xxxxxxxxxx

BETWEEN:

UK CAR PARK MANAGEMENT LTD (Claimant)

-and-

xxxxxxxxxxxx (Defendant)

________________________________________
DEFENCE
________________________________________

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 XXXX at XXXX Business Park, and had a valid permit to be parked in that bay.

3. The Particulars of Claim state that the Defendant !!!8220;was the registered keeper and/or the driver of the vehicle(s)!!!8221;. 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 prorpietary interest in the land, or that it has the necessary authorisation from the landowner to issue parking charge notices, and to pursue payment by means of litigation.

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.

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

Le_Kirk

When adding your specific points about the signs, remove the !!!8220 as they were left over from a forum glitch last year. Also, if the claimant is trying to recover extra money, search forum for Abuse of Process thread by beamerguy and add the text from post # 14 of that thread written by Coupon-mad. Precede the words "IT IS ORDERED THAT ...." by "The judges stated in their orders...." Makes no sense? It will when you find beamerguy's thread.

KeithP

Not worth commenting on something you have just lifted from another thread.

Customise it to fit your circumstances and then ask for comment on what you propose to file.