county court claim - civil enforcement

stansmum

nosferatu1001 said:

Have you sorted your costs assessment?

This is my proposed schedule of costs.  Is this reasonable?  I have scrapped the stationery costs, given guidance under current arrangements is to email these to the court.  Do these still need posting to the claimant though?  or is email acceptable for this too?

In the County Court at xxxx

Claim Number: xxx

Hearing Date: xxx

 

DEFENDANT'S SCHEDULE OF COSTS

 

Ordinary Costs

Loss of earnings/leave, incurred through attendance at Court [insert date] £100.00

Return mileage from home address to Court (46 miles x £0.45) £20.70

Parking near Court £6.50

Sub-total £127.20

 

Further costs for Claimant's unreasonable behaviour, pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 27.14(2)(g)

Research, preparation and drafting of documents (16 hours at Litigant in Person rate of £19 per hour) £304

Sub-total £304

£ TOTAL COSTS CLAIMED £431.20

Signed

Xxx

 

Date

xxx

stansmum

In terms of a draft of the covering email, I have almost entirely plagiarised @Coupon-mad's with some slight tweaks.  Mainly changing the global sum to £170, and the opening line of point (d).  I am not sure about the bit in italics - can this be a generic statement, or do i need to provide something to back this up?
thanks in advance 

Dear District Judge xxxxxxx, 

Re: Claim number xxxxxxxx - hearing date set for xx/xx/2020
Important Preliminary matter and Witness statement and evidence from the Defendant
(served by email due to COVID_19 measures)

I am the Defendant.  The appended witness statement and evidence bundle, as well as this covering email, has also been sent to the Claimant's litigation team.  In the event of directions for a future hearing in person at this court, hard copies will be provided when I have access to a printer.

Preliminary matter
I am aware that there is more than sufficient information available in this case to activate the court's duty, as set out in s71 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 ('the CRA').  

The CRA imposes a duty upon courts in all consumer contract cases, to apply the test of fairness in s71 of the CRA and I draw specific attention to more than one breach of CRA Schedule 2, as explained in my witness statement.   Due to this, and to remove an unnecessary burden on the court, I invite the Judge who may at this stage be considering an Order for a Telephone Hearing or adjournment, to instead exercise the court's case management powers pursuant to CPR 3.4, to strike this claim out without a hearing in any format.   

This has already occurred in multiple parking claims in recent months, with duplicate reasons used by Judges sitting at courts as widely spread as Southampton, Warwick, IOW, Caernarfon, Luton and Skipton.  Failed applications with hearings attended by two barristers acting on behalf of parking firms have taken place at Skipton (February 2020, before District Judge Faye Wright) as well as at Southampton, before District Judge Grand.  I refer to my exhibit transcript of the Approved Judgment in Britannia Parking Ltd v Crosby and Anor (11/11/2019) which pays regard to the Supreme Court binding case law and the duty on the courts to invoke s71 of the CRA.

This parking charge claim has been deliberately exaggerated to reach a global sum of £170 despite the Claimant and their legal advisers being well aware by now, that such a sum is unrecoverable in parking charge cases because it is an attempt to go behind case law and statute law, and taints the entire claim.  As such, the Defendant draws attention to the Claimant's continued 'forum shopping' and their clear intention of finding victims who will pay in full without defending, or a less than competent court to allow them to claim a sum far higher than they can lawfully recover. 

Further, there has been no serious attempt to comply with the CPRs and the Claimant's incoherent, stylised particulars do not constitute compliance.  These cases unnecessarily delay and clutter court listings and represent a contemptuous and significant abuse of process.

To assist with the efficient disposal of the case, I attach an editable (Word Document) Draft Order.

For the avoidance of doubt, should the court decide against striking the claim out, I am not in agreement with the case being heard 'on the papers' because:

(a)  this claim is following the usual oppressive parking robo-claim path, with a very sparse statement of case, later followed by a case made by way of ambush, with a tendency to produce prolix witness statements, right at the death.  This places Defendants at a huge disadvantage, given the first time they see any 'evidence' is at completion of the bundle, and their only chance to point out that large parts of the evidence are completely irrelevant, is at trial.  

(b) the case of JD Wetherspoon Plc v Harris and others [2013] EWHC 1088 (Ch.) is an example of the Court using its power to limit the evidence by striking out large parts of a witness statement for abuse, because it was written by a person with no personal knowledge who recited facts based on the documents he had read.  Similarly, parking charge witness statements contain template legal argument, misleading reliance upon ParkingEye v Beavis and even more irrelevant case law, and are more designed to stand in terrorem of defendants  than to assist the Court in determining the substantive issues.  

(c) Such 'witness statements' lack probative value and are very often created by freelance legal writers and 'signed' (or facsimile 'signed') by a third party who is not a witness in the true sense, and who relies upon misleading and irrelevant extracts of case law and undated, old or 'stock' images of signs, some of which are often not even present at the location in question.  

(d) In my case, I strongly believe that I must be afforded a fair opportunity to rebut any inaccuracies, which I expect given the Claimant's track record, in the 'evidence' re the car park location/event and highlight the failure to demonstrate a prominent/legible contract, or liability, or legitimate interest.  I am the only local witness, in the true sense, and I believe that, if the claim is to be heard, a decision cannot be fairly made without a hearing in my presence.  If the claim is not struck out, I would prefer a hearing in person once the pandemic lockdown is lifted.  However, I understand that to formally ask for an adjournment would be at a disproportionate cost which is not an option for me, so I await the court's Order and Directions.

Further, I am a key worker and am therefore adversely affected by the ongoing COVID-19 crisis.  I am a healthcare worker at [insert hospital] on the infectious diseases ward and am frequently picking up extra shifts to do all that I can during this crisis.  Due to this, I do not have time available to liaise with the claimant in advance of any telephone hearing or the case being decided on papers.

yours sincerely, 

Your name

nosferatu1001

I would break down the different elements of the unreasonable behaviour section. 
defence
WS
reading and reviewing C docs
visiting sites
etc. 

stansmum

nosferatu1001 said:

I would break down the different elements of the unreasonable behaviour section. 
defence
WS
reading and reviewing C docs
visiting sites
etc. 

Apologies, but I can't quite work out which document this advice is in relation to?

nosferatu1001

Your costs assessment. 

Look at it this way. You're asking a court to order the C to give you money for your time. Breaking it down into discrete amounts and not just a total makes it far more believable 

stansmum

nosferatu1001 said:

Your costs assessment. 

Look at it this way. You're asking a court to order the C to give you money for your time. Breaking it down into discrete amounts and not just a total makes it far more believable 

Of course. I will do that. Thank you 

stansmum

stansmum said:

nosferatu1001 said:

Your costs assessment. 

Look at it this way. You're asking a court to order the C to give you money for your time. Breaking it down into discrete amounts and not just a total makes it far more believable 

Of course. I will do that. Thank you 

Does the below look ok?  Also, do I just need to refer to this schedule in the witness statement and the draft order?  At the moment the case is to be based on papers (if the judge doesnt agree to strike out or postpone until it can be heard in person) so there would be no ordinary costs.  Shall i just add a line to the schedule saying this?  Or can I assume that the judge will draw such a conclusion?  Clearly these ordinary costs will be incurred if the hearing is postponed and my mum has to attend court. 

In the County Court at xxxx

Claim Number: xxx

Hearing Date: xxx

 

DEFENDANT'S SCHEDULE OF COSTS

 

Ordinary Costs

The table below sets out the costs incurred. 

Activity	Cost (£)
Loss of earnings/leave, incurred through attendance at Court [insert date]	100.00
Return mileage from home address to Court (46 miles x £0.45)	20.70
Parking near Court	6.50
Sub-total	127.20

 

Further costs for Claimant's unreasonable behaviour, pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 27.14(2)(g)

The table below sets out the time spent on activities to carry out research, preparation and the drafting of documents to defend the case at a Litigant in Person rate of £19 per hour).

Activity	Time spent (hours)	Cost (£) (hours x £19)
Researching and drafting Defence	4	76.00
Researching and drafting Witness statement and assembling court bundle	8	152.00
Visiting the site to collect evidence e.g. photographs	2	38.00
Reviewing court documents	2	38.00
Sub-total	16	304.00

 

£ TOTAL COSTS CLAIMED £431.20

Signed

Xxx

Date

xxx

nosferatu1001

Cap of £95 for attendance, so £100 is too high. Its also a half days loss of leave or pay. 

stansmum

nosferatu1001 said:

Cap of £95 for attendance, so £100 is too high. Its also a half days loss of leave or pay. 

Thank you.  I will reduce this accordingly.  
Did you have any thoughts on the witness statement?

Coupon-mad

Change the heading of the signed costs document to SUMMARY COSTS ASSESSMENT.

Remove this from the covering email, because CEL don't use solicitor/third party freelance writers:

(c) Such 'witness statements' lack probative value and are very often created by freelance legal writers and 'signed' (or facsimile 'signed') by a third party who is not a witness in the true sense, and who relies upon misleading and irrelevant extracts of case law and undated, old or 'stock' images of signs, some of which are often not even present at the location in question.  

Change this last bit as the final phrase makes no sense:

Due to this, I do not have time available to liaise with the claimant in advance of any telephone hearing or and for the above reasons I do not agree to the case being decided on papers.

Where is your WS? Repeat it here again please, as some of us never look too far back in a thread!