Help with County court claim

leighross

Thank you for all your help. Sorry if they are silly questions but alot of it is jargon to me. I've never dealt with this before so am learning (alot). It took me a few days to figure out what AoS means. 
Once I've sent the email with my defence how would I hear back and roughly when? As I think I've now figured out that it's not going to court. (Well at least for a few weeks) I thought that once I got that letter it was it I was going to court and will be fined and nothing was going to stop it. What's the procedure after I file a defence via email? Could I have just written to BW Legal to avoid all of this or was it best to be in county court? 

Redx

BARGEPOLE details the timeline and what happens when linked in the NEWBIES faq sticky thread, near the top of the forum

scroll down to the second post about court claims and read various info

for clarity, you will email your defence as a pdf attachment to the ccbc, as detailed in the reply by KeithP

the CCBC will send you a DQ in the post , you can fill this in (or download one from their MCOL site) , fill it in and email it back

the CCBC will then allocate it to a local court that you have named , where your court will post you further instructions in due course, possibly in a few months , it can usually be up to 6 months from now before any court hearing at your local court

these things move very slowly, so plan accordingly

once PREMIER PARK issued the court claim via B W LEGAL and using the CCBC MCOL , nothing stops it

leighross

Sorry silly question do I send the defence (email) to BW Legal or the county courts? 

Redx

neither

you email it to the CCBC in Northampton using ALL THE INFO that KeithP provided you with earlier in this thread, possibly page 2 ?

I told you this in my last reply where I said

for clarity, you will email your defence as a pdf attachment to the ccbc, as detailed in the reply by KeithP

leighross

@Redx thank you for your reply I think my problem is I am reading so many things that it is so confusing you have answered my above question sorry to be a pain and thank you for answering. I will keep updated what happens with regards to this claim.

Redx

your current task is not to worry about what happens etc and concentrate on drafting your defence and posting it on here for critique

NOTHING is more important , the time to understand all this can come after its been submitted

once your draft is approved , you can read what KeithP told you about emailing it once you have signed and dated it

do you really think jockeys worry about Beechers Brook and the last fence in the grand national when looking at the the oncoming first fence ?

Do you worry about which UNI your child is going to in say 17 years time ? , or what type of vehicle they will drive after they reach 17 or older ? or their next feed and nappy change ?

one thing at a time

Coupon-mad

 It took me a few days to figure out what AoS means. 

Days?  It's in post #5 of the NEWBIES thread in the fairly short & simple Acronyms list.

Could I have just written to BW Legal to avoid all of this

No.  This stage was inevitable.

Please, could you just follow what KeithP told you to do?  What are you struggling with about his advice?

leighross

Premier park limited stated that the contravention description is "WHOLE PERIOD OF PARKING NOT PAID FOR" I am trying to draft a defence. But just thought I'd let you know what the actual reason as to why I am now receiving a county court letter.

leighross

Also I've been doing some research, 
I don't believe the NTK is POFA compliant I believe it fails:
(2) The notice must
(a) specify the vehicle, the defendant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates. 
The NTK only specifies the day and time the PCN was issued. No period of parking specified. 

leighross

@KeithP @Le_Kirk @Coupon-mad @nosferatu1001 @Redx
I have a draft of my defence. Is paragraph 6 needed? Also does anything need to be added or taken away? I need to go to my library and print off and sign and then scan as I don't have these facilities at home. Everything I'm doing is also done on my smart phone so applogise if anything is missed or not understood.
I'm hoping to send the defence email over the weekend. Many thanks 
IN THE COUNTY COURT

CLAIM No: xxxxxxxxxx

BETWEEN:

PREMIER PARK LIMITED (Claimant)

-and-

xxxxxxxxxxxx (Defendant)

________________________________________
DEFENCE
________________________________________

1. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.

2. It is believed that it will be a matter of common ground that claim relates to a purported debt as the result of the issue of a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) in relation to an alleged breach of the terms and conditions by the driver of the vehicle XXXX when it was parked at The Quadrant Shopping Centre Dunstable.

3. The Claimant has failed to issue a Letter Before Action, or provided any details of the claim prior to issuing a claim at court. As such, the Claimant has failed to comply with the Practice Direction – Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols, para 6 (a) & (c).

4. The Particulars of Claim state that the Defendant “was the registered keeper and/or the driver of the vehicle(s)”. 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.

5. 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.

6. 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'. The signage gave no requirement to display the valid parking permit.


7. The Claimant is put to strict proof that the vehicle did not have a valid permit to be parked in that bay.

8. 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 need to stand directly in front of a dangerous access ramp with poor visibility. It is, therefore, denied that the Claimant's signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract.

9. The Claimant is put to strict proof that it has sufficient proprietary 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.

10. The Notice To Keeper does not specify the period of parking, as required by the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4, Section 8 (2) (a) & (b) and therefore cannot hold the keeper liable.

11. 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.

12. 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 Civil Procedure Rules 3.4.

I believe the facts contained in this Defence are true.

Name
Signature
Date