Vehicle Control Services PCN in a residential car park

Le_Kirk

I should think the OP has done a runner, this thread has been taken so far off track.

Umkomaas

Le_Kirk said:

I should think the OP has done a runner, this thread has been taken so far off track.

Very sad. There are no winners (other than the parking companies) when this happens. 

nosferatu1001

Indeed, they should concentrate on the claim - tjhat is fairly clear and simple to defend!

Scrapit

Le_Kirk said:

I should think the OP has done a runner, this thread has been taken so far off track.

They were last on 9th June at 15:15 so I doubt it, they haven't read this yet.

MoneySavingPest

Le_Kirk said:

I should think the OP has done a runner, this thread has been taken so far off track.

I'm still here - no worries on that front! 
Thanks for the healthy debate - having read it, I think I agree with the argument that the counterclaim idea is probably not a wise one in my case, as my costs only come from the fact I am being hassled by a claim which I have to defend.  I assume I can claim my costs of defending as part of my defence submission, so that's probably the right route. If I have that route, then I can see that's the one the court would want me to use, rather than some alternative route.

Coupon-mad

Yes, search the forum for summary costs assessment (a stage that comes a couple of weeks before a hearing so it's way off).  Examples are shown in threads by @keypulse and @Chefdave to name two.

MoneySavingPest

Hi All,
Draft defence attached for comment. I've tried to bring out the various grounds of defence clearly using the bold headings so they easy to spot in what is quite a long and text heavy document; also slightly re-ordered some of the text to help the flow for the reader.
Also wasn't sure about retaining the text in yellow - my particulars of claim do give some account of how the claimant thinks I am liable, in terms of the vehicle involved, location, date, PCN number, basis of contract being the signs, agreement to pay the sum in 28 days but didn't, being liable as driver or keeper etc. Presume they can submit what their signs say as evidence at a later stage, so not necessary for them to do that at PoC stage?
Also, I need to submit this by Friday. What counts as submitted? I will send via the e-mail address as recommended, but do I also have to chase the MoJ to get the MCOL portal updated by the deadline as well?
Thanks all.

nosferatu1001

The PoC fail even in your case. 
They fail to say precusely what term was breached, and they do not include a copy of the terms broken. 
Youre required to FILE. FILE has a specific meaning - teh court has to ha ve received it by that date. 

KeithP

MoneySavingPest said:

Also, I need to submit this by Friday. What counts as submitted? I will send via the e-mail address as recommended, but do I also have to chase the MoJ to get the MCOL portal updated by the deadline as well?

When you send the email, you'll receive an automated response. That is the definitive filing date/time.

The CCBC do have some delays so MCOL will probably not show the Defence filing date for some days but it will eventually show the correct filing date. If for any obscure reason it doesn't, just wave that email receipt at them.

DoaM

Minor comment ... in item 9 the term AOS is used but without any definition of what it means (Approved Operator Scheme).

Also, the Alternative Defences heading should be forced to the next page so it lies with the content.

Item 21 ... his/her - which is it? (It can't be either/or)