Court claim for wrongly issue PCN

1505grandad

"However, now the keeper has received a court claim. The ..................."

The above in first post needs amending.

jstark

To amend for the comments received

Redx

in the first post , there is a word that wants altering to the keeper, near the bottom , check for each and every failure of the correct terminology and edit it

the above is not a legal defence , its the makings of a draft witness statement

KeithP

Sorry, but that doesn't look like any Defence I've seen recently.

Have you read any of the example Defences linked from the second post of the NEWBIES thread?

There's a link to the NEWBIES thread in one of my earlier posts.


In detail:

Para 1 - surely it was the driver that purchased the ticket.

Para 2 - likewise it was the driver who displayed the ticket.

Para 3 - the court will not be interested in what may or may not have happened to others.

jstark

Redx said:

in the first post , there is a word that wants altering to the keeper, near the bottom , check for each and every failure of the correct terminology and edit it

the above is not a legal defence , its the makings of a draft witness statement

Thanks- has this now been captured in the edit? Also a few of the quotes of the previous posts include the wrong terms...

jstark

KeithP said:

Sorry, but that doesn't look like any Defence I've seen recently.

Have you read any of the example Defences linked from the second post of the NEWBIES thread?

There's a link to the NEWBIES thread in one of my earlier posts.


In detail:

Para 1 - surely it was the driver that purchased the ticket.

Para 2 - likewise it was the driver who displayed the ticket.

Para 3 - the court will not be interested in what may or may not have happened to others.

Thanks for yours and Redx’s comments , the posts you refer to will be re reviewed and a revised defence will be drafted.

Redx

jstark said:

Redx said:

in the first post , there is a word that wants altering to the keeper, near the bottom , check for each and every failure of the correct terminology and edit it

the above is not a legal defence , its the makings of a draft witness statement

Thanks- has this now been captured in the edit? Also concerned a few of the quotes of the previous posts include the wrong terms...

pm Le_Kirk and ask them to edit their post accordingly

jstark

Please find a revised defence below using both of Bargepole’s defences from the newbie thread as a helpful basis . As before would be grateful for any comments:
***

In The County Court

Claim No: XXXXXXX

Between

XXX Ltd (Claimant)

-and-

XXXXXXX (Defendant)

____________

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, of which the Defendant is the registered keeper, was parked in accordance with the terms set out.

3. The Particulars of Claim state that the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or the driver of the vehicle. 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.

4. The facts of the matter are that the driver correctly purchased a pay and display ticket from the correct machine for the duration of time that their car was parked at the claimant’s car park on the material date that the claimant has issued a parking charge notice for. The driver subsequently left the car park before the duration of the stay paid for had ended.

5. Accordingly, it is denied that the Defendant breached any of the Claimant's purported contractual terms, whether express, implied, or by conduct.

6. 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.

7. The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant has not incurred £157 [NOTE: the claim form says: £182 amount claimed (for £100 parking charge) plus court fee: £25 plus legal costs: £50 - so is £182 correct to put here?] costs to pursue an alleged £100 debt. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, in Schedule 4, Para 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.

8. In summary, the Claimant's particulars disclose no legal basis for the sum claimed, and the Court is invited to dismiss the claim in its entirety.

Statement of Truth:

I believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true.

Name

Signature

Date

KeithP

Paragraph numbering need tidying, but much much better.

Wait for others to comment on the detail though, but definitely heading in the right direction..

jstark

KeithP said:

Paragraph numbering need tidying, but much much better.

Wait for others to comment on the detail though, but definitely heading in the right direction..

Thanks for the quick response- page numbering has been amended for.