County Court Defence Help Please

dollydoodar

thank you so much for you support. exclamation marks removed

1505grandad

It may be me but para 6 says:-

"it is denied that 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."

and seems to suggest that the signage is NOT too small etc.

In a specimen defence written by bargepole sets out signage points as :-

" 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.

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."

Le_Kirk

Good spot, you are quite right, it appears to have been written by copying rather than copying and pasting. You get so used to seeing the correct words that when the wrong ones appear it is easy for the eye and brain to be misled. Of course the OP would spot this when proof reading before submitting.

dollydoodar

unfortunately my proof reading was not very good and i have indeed sent the denial about the signage oops. oh well can't change it now can i?
i received an acknowledgement from the court yesterday...

dollydoodar

Hi everyone, I received the SAR today and I am finding this part quite interesting. Does it sound like the lady contradicts herself? Hope the photo link works as it's my first time posting a photo

KeithP

Here's your link:

https://ibb.co/R0Q23MX

The pertinent part is:

The appellant has identified herself to POPLA as the driver...

Did you do that? Perhaps by ticking the wrong box when submitting your PoPLA appeal?

dollydoodar

I can't imagine why I would have done that as I was not the driver. It is a manual van which I am unable to drive due to disability. How did you see the photo?

KeithP

dollydoodar wrote: »

How did you see the photo?

By proceeding as if to quote your post and seeing [noparse][/noparse] there.

It looks like imgbb have joined the band of image hosts that do not allow images hosted on their site to be featured on other websites.

dollydoodar

what's the best place to host an image? and how can i see the popla appeal i sent?

dollydoodar

I received the SAR from popla today and although they state that I admit to being the driver, I do not. I do say "I did not realise that the car park had new rules and that I needed to present the car park ticket at the till for free parking or else I would of done so" and I did do those things but that is not admitting to being the driver, is it? I think they're just trying their luck...