Car parked at waterside inn

AudiRay

I have received a county court business Centre claim from Gladstones Solicitors on behalf of UKPS Ltd claiming that my car was parked at the above pub in Leamington Spa
I have no copies of the letters that were allegedly sent to me but I believe that they may be claiming that my car was parked as a non customer of the waterside inn about 18 months ago

I am not sure how to defend this?

Could someone point me in the right direction please

Thanks for your help

KeithP

Hi and welcome.

What is the Issue Date on your Claim Form?

Post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread is the best place to start when creating a Defence.

Coupon-mad

Also read lots of Gladstones claim threads (search the forum for those keywords) and copy & adapt a 2019 defence that's similar to yours.

AudiRay

Thank you

the issue date is 9 September . I have until the middle of this week to reply I believe

The_Deep

Did you use the pub? If so you stand a much better chance of having it cancelled than if you did not.

KeithP

AudiRay wrote: »

the issue date is 9 September . I have until the middle of this week to reply I believe

With a Claim Issue Date of 9th September, you have until Monday 30th September to do the Acknowledgment of Service, but there is nothing to be gained by delaying it. To do the AoS, follow the guidance offered in a Dropbox file linked from post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread. About ten minutes work - no thinking required.

Having done the AoS, you have until 4pm on Monday 14th October 2019 to file your Defence.

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


When you are happy with the content, your Defence could 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.

AudiRay

I have managed to put together a draft defence

I would be grateful if some of you could crtiique it before I post it
Thanks in advance
THE DEFENCE:


1. It is admitted that the defendant is the registered keeper of the vehicle in question. However, the claimant has no cause of action and has filed the claim without providing any information to the defendant whatsoever.

1.1 Neither the defendant, nor any other possible drivers recall any parking charge notice (PCN) from the past.

2. The Particulars of Claim XXXX state that the Defendant XXXX was the registered keeper and / or the driver of the vehicle XXXX. This assertion indicates that the Claimant has failed to identify a Cause of Action, and is simply offering a menu of choices. As such, the Claim XXXX fails to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4, or with Civil Practice Direction 16, paras. 7.3 to 7.7 as there is nothing which specifies how the terms were breached.

3.The claimant has not complied with pre-court protocol as there was no previous correspondence relating to the alleged contravention had been received and the defendant has no idea what the claim is about-why the charge arose, what the original charge was- what the alleged contract was , nothing that could be considered a fair exchange of information .

4. The vague POC discloses nothing that can lead to a claim in law. The parking event was far too long ago to expect a registered keeper to recall the day or who was driving and given the lack of any previous information, the defendant doubts that any legitimate interest or clear signage applies to this case.

5. 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.

6. it is denied that the claimant has authority to bring this claim. The proper claimant is the land owner. Strict proof is required that there is a chain of contracts leading from the land owner to UKPS Limited and that this chain of contract was valid in its entirety on the date of the alleged offence.

7. The POFA does not permit the claimant to recover a sum greater than the parking charge on the day before the notice to keeper was issued. The sum cannot exceed the BPA Cop ceiling of £100 and the claimant cannot recover additional charges.

8. The claimant has inexplicably added ‘costs or damages’ bolted onto the alleged PCN despite using a solicitor to file the claim, who must be aware that the CPR 27.14 does not permit such ‘admin ‘charge to be recovered in the small claims court.

9. In any event, the Beavis case confirmed that a parking firm not in possession cannot plead their case in damages and could only collect the already inflated parking charge of (in that case £85) which more than covered the very minimal costs of running an automated/template letter parking regime.



10. The claimant is put to strict proof to show how any alleged costs/damages have been incurred and that it formed a prominent legible part of any terms on signage, and that it was, in fact expended. To add vague damages plus alleged costs on top is a wholly disingenuous attempt at double recovery and the defendant is alarmed by this gross abuse of process.

11. According to Ladak v DRC Locums UKEAT/0488/13/LA the claimant can only recover the direct and provable costs of the time spent on preparing the claim in a legal capacity, not any administration cost.

12. It is denied that the claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. In summary it is the defendant’s position that the poorly pleaded claim discloses no cause of action, is without merit, and has no real prospect of success.

13. The defendant invites the court to strike out the claim.

I believe the facts contained in this defence to be true.


Name
Signature
date

Le_Kirk

3.The claimant has not complied with pre-court protocol as there was no previous correspondence relating to the alleged contravention had been received and the defendant has no idea what the claim is about-why the charge arose, what the original charge was- what the alleged contract was , nothing that could be considered a fair exchange of information .

Better as: -

3.The claimant has not complied with pre-court protocol as [STRIKE]there was [/STRIKE]no previous correspondence relating to the alleged contravention had been received and the defendant has no idea what the claim is about, why the charge arose, what the original charge was, what the alleged contract was, nothing that could be considered a fair exchange of information.

4. The vague POC discloses nothing that can lead to a claim in law. The parking event was far too long ago to expect a registered keeper to recall the day or who was driving and given the lack of any previous information, the defendant doubts that any legitimate interest or clear signage applies to this case.

Maybe put the onus back on the PPC: -

4. The vague POC discloses nothing that can lead to a claim in law. The parking event was far too long ago to expect a registered keeper to recall the day or who was driving and given the lack of any previous information, [STRIKE]the defendant doubts that any legitimate interest or[/STRIKE] the claimant is put to strict proof that any legitimate interest or clear signage applies to this case.

Also you might want to find beamerguy's thread about abuse of process to add more weight to your points 7,8 & 9.

MonkeyRum

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

KeithP

AudiRay wrote: »

I have managed to put together a draft defence

I would be grateful if some of you could crtiique it before I post it

Post it??

What are you thinking of??

Please re-read post #6 above - in your very own thread.

AudiRay

Many thanks for your help I have emailed my defence in now
Apologies for writing post by mistake
I really appreciate your help