Excel Parking Claim Form - Defence for Review

nosferatu1001

As expected...you've read the next steps in the newbies thread?

Fiortdunlop2020

Hi @ nosferatu1001 have done previously but if being honest need to again to refresh.
What I am unclear of is "28 days before final hearing send WS and documents", so this will be post 28th August as final hearing date not set.

nosferatu1001

You won't get a hearing date yet. First your claim is allocated to the right court, then that court schedules the hearing. 

Where is the bit in italics from? Do you have that ordered already? As usually the court assigned to sets the directions and not anyone else. 

Fiortdunlop2020

@ nosferatu1001 the italics .."28 days before final hearing send WS and documents".. is from the Notice of Allocation Point 4 2nd para as ordered by the district judge

Isn't the court Warwick ?

Fiortdunlop2020

Hi just an update: sent DCBL Abuse of letter (based on beamerguy template) in response to the second claim. DCBL responded back with:
"Thank you for your letter dated 11th June 2020, the contents of which is noted.
As a claim has been issued you will need to address age court documentation.
please refer to the guidance notes on the Claim Form and if you have any further question queries we recommend you seek independent legal advice".

I now intend to email/write DCBL with 'cause of action estoppel'. Having reviewed the 'cause of action estoppel' thread,  I am unclear wether this correspondence goes to legal team only, included in WS for first Claim, defence for second claim or email court directly, or is it all 4 ? apologies for my ignorance.
Kind Regards

Coupon-mad

All four, I'd say.

Fiortdunlop2020

Hi perfect many thanks!

Fiortdunlop2020

Hi so was going to use this letter Coupon-mad you had posted on Cause of Action estoppel and removed items I felt not salient in my situation. I intend to send to DCB and then then the content bargepole suggests to send to court. I will then elaborate in both defence for second claim and witness statement for first claim.
Thanks

Dear Sir/Madam,

Thank you for your response dated 16th June 2020, to my correspondence highlighting abuse of process associated with claim ref xxxx. After further reviewing I would like to also highlight that in addition claim xxx is Cause of Action estoppel.

Being legally represented, the Claimant knows, or should know, that by detaching or allowing to remain detached, elements of alleged debts and issuing separate claims, each which rely upon essentially duplicate particulars and facts, is an abuse of the civil litigation process.  

This Claimant has issued two claims relating to parking charges for same carpark and parking incidents within one month.
Claim number xxxxxxx - relates to PCN xxx issued on 24th September 2019.
Claim number xxxxxxx - relates to a PCN xxx issued on the 22nd October 2019, relying on the same facts.

In Arnold v National Westminster Bank plc [1991] 3 All ER 41 the court noted that cause of action estoppel “…applies where a cause of action in a second action is identical to a cause of action in the first, the latter having been between the same parties or their privies and having involved the same subject matter.”

In Henderson -v- Henderson [1843] 67 ER 313 the court noted the following:
(i) when a matter becomes subject to litigation, the parties are required to advance their whole case;
(ii) the Court will not permit the same parties to re-open the same subject of litigation regarding matters which should have been advanced in the earlier litigation, but were not owing to negligence, inadvertence, or error;
(iii) this bar applies to all matters, both those on which the Court determined in the original litigation and those which would have been advanced if the party in question had exercised ''reasonable diligence''.

By the Claimant's negligence or by intent, filing two claims, allowing them to continue to two separate hearings and choosing not to pay the appropriate court fee to apply for leave to consolidate them and amend the particulars into one claim, permits of no reasonable explanation.  The Court and myself will have to make preparations for two separate court hearings in coming months, causing unnecessary cost in time and money, and specifically in terms of duplicating the paperwork, intimidation and distress for me as a Litigant in Person.

By filing the first claim and failing to advance their whole case, any cause of action was immediately extinguished for any other similar fact parking charges against myself as Defendant.   The courts may estop a second claim where the cause of action is substantially the same.  I invite the court to vacate the second hearing and summarily dismiss that claim under the grounds of cause of action estoppel.  In the alternative, the Court is invited to consolidate the claims to be determined together, and to apply appropriate sanctions against the Claimant.

I will attend the first hearing and will seek my full costs from the Claimant, whose conduct in the pre- and post-action phases has been wholly unreasonable. Ignorance of the existence of cause of action estoppel is no excuse.  My research discovered the above authorities and I am just a LiP forced to spend hours trying to get up to speed with a process I have never experienced before.  But this is a Claimant well used to the court process, able to rely upon advice from yourselves as appointed solicitors.

Yours Faithfully

Coupon-mad

After further reviewing I would like to also highlight that in addition claim xxx is likely to be barred by the courts, due to Cause of Action estoppel.

Fiortdunlop2020

Morning thank you