Court claim has arrived. One Parking Solutions.

junior_oak

1505grandad said:

Only the appendixes - the others are for the WS.

"I mentioned Pace vs MR N and LinkParking vs Ms P as Appendixes so I guess I need to have those printed along with the Appendixes A,B and C?"

Okay thanks, so don't mention those cases at all in the defence? or you mean just don't make them Appendixes and print them out? 

nosferatu1001

No need to mention them at all. Theres a reason the template defence doesnt mention them. 

junior_oak

Okay thanks, I will remove them then.  I figured the template doesnt mention them because its an Abuse of Process template and those cases may not apply to everyone if they don't have a lease which entitles them to park in their own space, so it isn't always relevant to everyones cases I suppose.

Le_Kirk

junior_oak said:

I figured the template doesn't mention them because its an Abuse of Power template and those cases may not apply to everyone if they don't have a lease which entitles them to park in their own space, so it isn't always relevant to everyone's cases I suppose.

Abuse of Process!

junior_oak

Le_Kirk said:

junior_oak said:

I figured the template doesn't mention them because its an Abuse of Power template and those cases may not apply to everyone if they don't have a lease which entitles them to park in their own space, so it isn't always relevant to everyone's cases I suppose.

Abuse of Process!

Haha yes sorry, process not power!

Coupon-mad

junior_oak said:

Hi guys,
I did use defences from the newbies, but I have now used the Template that you created Coupon-mad, thanks so much for doing that for us all to use! I will just paste onto this comment my additions that I am putting in as points 16 and 17. I removed point 16 from the template as it did not apply to me.
So if you guys could feedback if my personal additions seem okay that would be great and on the way its numbered. I mentioned Pace vs MR N and LinkParking vs Ms P as Appendixes so I guess I need to have those printed along with the Appendixes A,B and C?

If it seems okay then I will get on and submit the whole defense to the CCBC. Then I guess I need to write up a WS to take to court. Or should I wait to see if it even goes that far first? Thank you in advance once again!

MY ADDITIONS TO TEMPLATE C AS FOLLOWS:

16. (i) It is denied that the Defendant or lawful users of his/her vehicle were in breach of any parking conditions or were not permitted to park in circumstances where an express permission to park had been granted to the Defendant permitting the above mentioned vehicle to be parked by the current occupier and leaseholder of [address], whose tenancy agreement permits the parking of vehicle(s) in the Allocated Parking Area.

(ii) The Defendant avers that there was an absolute entitlement to park deriving from the terms of the lease, which cannot be fettered by any alleged parking terms. The lease terms provide the right to park a private motor vehicle in the relevant Allocated Parking Area, without limitation as to ownership of vehicle, the user of the vehicle or the requirement to display a parking permit. A copy of the lease will be provided to the Court, together with witness evidence that prior permission to park had been given.

 

17.    The Defendant avers that the operator’s signs cannot:

(i)            override the existing rights enjoyed by residents

(ii)          that parking easements cannot retrospectively and unilaterally be restricted where provided for within the lease. The Defendant will rely upon the judgments of Pace vs Mr N (2016) and Link Parking vs Ms P (2016). (Appendix D and E)

17.1 Accordingly it is denied that:

(i)        there was any agreement as between the Defendant or driver of the vehicle and the Claimant

(ii)       there was any obligation (at all) to display a permit; and

(iii)         the Claimant has suffered loss or damage or that there is a lawful basis to pursue a claim for loss.

END OF ADDITIONS

Very good as long as this sentence below (and these exhibits) are removed and kept till WS & evidence stage:

The Defendant will rely upon the judgments of Pace vs Mr N (2016) and Link Parking vs Ms P (2016). (Appendix D and E)

junior_oak

Okay great thank you for the advice! I will make the amendments and then submit the defence tomorrow! 

Is there any possibility the CCBC will dismiss the case and it not even get to an actual court? 

Redx

no , because they are just a government department dealing with paperwork

if a judge were to see it then yes it may happen, but the chances are that the CCBC will file your defence and send it to the claimant, then do the DQ at some point in the future, same as all the rest , do not assume that the CCBC is a court , its not and they say so on their website, its an admin centre like the DVLA or the Pension Service or the DWP

the claimant has to pay a court fee to your nominated court long before it actually gets to a courtroom (they paid an initial filing fee to MCOL, so its a many stage process)

Fruitcake

junior_oak said:

Okay great thank you for the advice! I will make the amendments and then submit the defence tomorrow! 

Is there any possibility the CCBC will dismiss the case and it not even get to an actual court? 

Your crystal ball is as good as ours. Assume it is going ahead and prepare accordingly.

What did the landowner say when you complained?

Have you complained yet to your MP about this unregulated scam. 

junior_oak

Fruitcake said:

What did the landowner say when you complained?
Have you complained yet to your MP about this unregulated scam. 

I asked them back in 2017 when this was happening to get the tickets cancelled, but all they did was speak to One Parking and they offered me a price that was less than the bogus Bailiff letters were trying to get off me. So I ignored that. 
No I haven't, just focusing on the actual defence prep at the moment.