Preparation of Defence HX / Gladstones

KeithP

blancswann said:

1505grandad said:

Para 2  -  "The defendant paid the correct amount and did not overstay the specified time."

Para 3   -   "The claimant states the defendant failed to purchase or validate a pay and display ticket."

Para 3.1   -   "Any breach of contract should have been identified at the point of transaction and if incorrect should have been rejected or made clear to the defendant at this stage. Allowing the defendant reasonable opportunity to correct or reject the terms of the contract."

No mention that there was anyone else i.e. driver 

Shall I change the wording from defendant to driver?

Yes, of course. You must. It was the driver who drove the car.

Le_Kirk

blancswann said:

Le_Kirk said:

It's just DEFENCE
It's VRM not VRN or VNR
If they have added £60 for debt recovery costs or similar phrasing, check out the Abuse of Process threads (discussions) at: -

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6014081/abuse-of-process-district-judge-tells-bwlegal/p1  and:-

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/75937581#Comment_75937581

What does VRM mean?
what do you mean ‘it’s just Defence’?

You wrote DEFENCE STATEMENT but it should be DEFENCE
VRM is the mark on your car, V5C (log book) and is Vehicle Registration Mark.  You made three errors if I remember correctly two x VNR and one x VRN.

blancswann

@Coupon-mad, @Le_Kirk @KeithP I've made amendments as suggested on this thread, does this look ok?

DEFENCE

 

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

 

2. The facts are that the vehicle, registration xxxx xxx, of which the defendant is the registered keeper, was parked on the 05/06/2019 in a parking bay at Marco Island Car Park and the defendant has a valid proof of payment receipt showing a partial matching VRM. The driver paid the correct amount and did not overstay the specified time.

 

3. The claimant states the driver failed to purchase or validate a pay and display ticket. The defendant is in possession of the parking receipt which states that the ticket does not need to be displayed, therefore the defendant is not clear as to what the pay and display ticket that the claimant refers to is.

 

3.1. The electronic ticketing machine accepted a partial VRM and proceeded to complete the cash transaction and issued the payment receipt. Any breach of contract should have been identified at the point of transaction and if incorrect should have been rejected or made clear to the driver at this stage. Allowing the driver reasonable opportunity to correct or reject the terms of the contract.

 

4. The Particulars of Claim contain no contractual details and fails to establish a cause of action which would enable the defendant to prepare a specific defence. It just states ‘a breach of terms’ but does not offer any further details as to what the alleged contract was nor anything which could be considered a fair exchange of information.

 

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.

 

7. The defendant has written confirmation from the landowner representative clearly stating that the purchased parking receipt resembled the VRM to a satisfactory level and therefore agreed to cancel the charge.

 

8. The Claimant is not the landowner and is merely an agent acting on behalf of the landowner and has failed to demonstrate their legal standing to form a 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 Claimant has at no time provided an explanation how the sum has been calculated, the conduct that gave rise to it or how the amount has climbed from £100 to £160. This appears to be an added cost with apparently no qualification and an attempt at double recovery, which the POFA Schedule 4 specifically disallows. 

 

11. The Protection of Freedom Act Para 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper. 

 

12. The claim includes an additional £50 for ‘Legal representative’s costs’, such costs are not permissible under Civil Procedure Rules – Part 27. 

 

13. The driver did not enter into any 'agreement on the charge', no consideration flowed between the parties and no contract was established. The Defendant denies that the driver would have agreed to pay the original demand of £100 to agree to the alleged contract had the terms and conditions of the contract been properly displayed and accessible. 

 

14. 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 CPR 3.4.

blancswann

Hi, is anyone able to help check my defence in my last post please?
TIA

1505grandad

A very recent post by C-m re: suggested template defence to adapt for all parking charge cases where they add false admin costs may be suitable:-

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6108153/suggested-template-defence-to-adapt-for-all-parking-charge-cases-where-they-add-false-admin-costs/p1

blancswann

1505grandad said:

A very recent post by C-m re: suggested template defence to adapt for all parking charge cases where they add false admin costs may be suitable:-

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6108153/suggested-template-defence-to-adapt-for-all-parking-charge-cases-where-they-add-false-admin-costs/p1

Thank you @1505grandad, I've used the suggested defence as per the shared link and scrapped the one above. Thank you for taking the time to reply and highlight this new thread.

blancswann

Hi, Today I have received Gladstones witness statement and evidence, two months prior to the court case, which is scheduled for 21st October. I have not started my witness statement yet. Is it worth posting their WS on here for anyone to give me some advice on?
TIA

KeithP

Most unusual for a Claimant to serve a Witness Statement so early. They have the same target dates as you.

Look again at your Notice of Allocation. The Notice that gives the hearing date.

Is there not a paragraph something like:

Each party must deliver to every other party and to the court office copies of all documents on which he intends to rely at the hearing no later than [ . . . ] [14 days before the hearing].

Might be on the back.

Those documents you intend to rely on are your Witness Statement and evidence.

nosferatu1001

As above
Check to make sure YOU have not missed anything. Tell us your deadline.
Yes of course its worth having their WS on here. Do not redact anything unless it IDs YOU and YOUR CASE, nothing eelse. Especially the contract, it MUST be unredacted by the claimant. Theyre not permitted to redact unilaterally.

blancswann

I'm pretty sure I've not missed the date...? I've read and re-read the Notice.