Defending of a county court claim

nosferatu1001

Have you read the defence appendices, which name the legal firms involved, to tell you precisely the answer to that question? 

Coupon-mad

I think the defence looks fine with or without the POFA stuff, but why do you think OPS didn't comply?  was it a very old PCN?  I've seen shedloads of their PCNs and they didn't comply with the POFA up till 2017, but sometime in 2018 they changed their NTK wording.

brokebas12

Coupon-mad said:

I think the defence looks fine with or without the POFA stuff, but why do you think OPS didn't comply?  was it a very old PCN?  I've seen shedloads of their PCNs and they didn't comply with the POFA up till 2017, but sometime in 2018 they changed their NTK wording.

Admittedly I was confused to what the NTK was. I am wiser now, and will probably remove that para.

brokebas12

This was the signage at the site.

Redx

Bear in mind that you are leaving the fleshing out for your witness statement , so you mention POFA and signs etc in the defence , but your WS expands on the story and what you have found out since

Spend too much time on expanding the defence and you have sweet f a to say in your WS

Stick to what coupon mad and others have said , stick to the process and rules of engagement

The stage of WS also includes exhibits like that sign , plus a summary costs assessment

brokebas12

brokebas12 said:

13.   In the alternative, the defence is prejudiced and the court is invited to note that, contrary to the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims, the Letter Before Claim omitted evidence of any breach and failed to append the wording of the sign or consumer notice.  Further, the Particulars of Claim are embarrassing and incoherent, lacking specificity re the location of the event and status of the contracting parties and failing to detail any conduct or liability that could give rise to a cause of action.  There is insufficient detail to ascertain the nature, basis and facts of the case but the sum claimed includes unrecoverable costs/damages and is clearly an abuse of process.

I am questioning whether this para is fit for the defence.
The particulars of claim comment on the location of the PCN & I did not receive a LBC. 
Would below still work?

- Further, the Particulars of Claim are embarrassing and incoherent, lacking specificity re the status of the contracting parties and failing to detail any conduct or liability that could give rise to a cause of action.  There is insufficient detail to ascertain the nature, basis and facts of the case but the sum claimed includes unrecoverable costs/damages and is clearly an abuse of process.

D_P_Dance

Probably the longest,  most difficult, verbose  sign I have ever seen.  It is no doubt  fine to commission a nuclear power station, but  to park one's car for an hour or so.  this is ludricrous.

IMO this  sign  alone could win you the court claim.  The amount (£80) is  far, far too small.  I cannot see any judge in the land agreeing that this is a fair contract.  Please  read the Consumer Rights Act 2015 wrt unfair T&Cs in consumer contracts.

Have you complained to your MP?

nosferatu1001

Obviously if you didnt receive a LBC, then instead of stating the LBC didnt contain sufficient detail, you state that tey did not serve  you one at all... its worse NOT to send one at all than to send a poor one, think about it

brokebas12

D_P_Dance said:

  to park one's car for an hour or so.  this is ludricrous.

The parking is for 24hrs.

Have you complained to your MP?

No, is this just an email I should send?

Also, that is a good photo! These signs are positioned high up on poles!

nosferatu1001

Yes, one you write. Or reseach others.