County court claims form defence template

ignavia

Coupon-mad's post about false costs, including the Recorder Cohen judgment, can be found at

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6279348/witness-statements-2-transcripts-re-parking-firms-false-costs-recorder-cohen-qc-judgment-2021/p1

Nosy

Thanks, i have Excel v Wilkinson. and i have just read @Coupon-mad post which i will add to mine. I am not sure if i am ok to add this now as this will be in addition the the WS i have already submitted- is it ok for me to do this?

also i noticed that the transcript; https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/1956/3.html  is not available as a printable RTF version and is crown copyright - am i ok to copy and paste the transcript to use as an exhibit as the judge wanted full transcripts. do i need to get the crown court permission for this?


below is what i will be adding 

 The Consumer Rights Act 2015 (‘CRA’) sets out the requirements that must be met - whether a consumer pleads it or not - in order for there to be a legally enforceable contract between suppliers of goods and services, and consumers. Section 62 deals with the requirement for contract terms and notices to be fair, and states at (1) and (2) that unfair contract terms and notices shall not be binding on the consumer.

-          Schedule 2 of the CRA gives examples of terms which may be regarded as unfair.  Of particular relevance to the instant case, are examples 10 and 14. Example 10 states: ‘A term which has the object or effect of irrevocably binding the consumer to terms with which the consumer has had no real opportunity of becoming acquainted before the conclusion of the contract.’ It is submitted that the vague term ‘costs on an indemnity basis’ would fall foul of this example, given that the Defendant would have needed to research the meaning of that term, and would not have had the opportunity to do so prior to entering the parking area.

-          Example 14 states: ‘A term which has the object or effect of giving the trader the discretion to decide the price payable under the contract after the consumer has become bound by it, where no price or method of determining the price is agreed when the consumer becomes bound.’ It is abundantly clear that the Claimant in this case is attempting to hold the Defendant liable for a sum which is not specified (prominently or at all) on the signage, and of which the Claimant subsequently decides the quantum. On any reasonable construction, this cannot possibly pass the test of fairness and is incapable of binding the Defendant.

-          The term ‘costs on the indemnity basis’ is further identified in the Guidance to the CRA published by the Competition and Markets Authority, which states at 5.14.3 that ‘Other kinds of penal provisions which may be unfair are clauses saying that the business can ... claim its legal costs on an ‘indemnity’ basis, that is all costs, not just costs reasonably incurred. The words ‘indemnity’ and ‘indemnify’ are also objectionable as legal jargon – see the section on transparency in part 2 of the guidance.’

Coupon-mad

You can provide a link to a Court of Appeal case I suppose, but all the rest must be actual full transcripts.  You do not want the final two you were looking for, they are superseded by Excel v Wilkinson and the Recorder Cohen judgment.

@Nosy, can you update your other thread now please?  People were asking about your outcome!

I really hope you have done the Government Consultation by email and objected absolutely to ANY debt recovery fake 'costs' being added on top of a parking charge (of course) and told them what you think of them increasing charges to £130 instead of £100...which is already extortionate.

You have 6 days to do the consultation.  Please, please, do and do it by email so you attach evidence.  Spread the word, is closes within days, next week!

Also, I hope you've also registered for the Group Action, against the DVLA (open to anyone with a PCN since 2018?).  Gotta be in it to win it!  Nothing to lose, and it's genuine.

Read the threads about those important matters, they both need doing, right now, this week.

Nosy

Thanks @Coupon-mad. I have updated other thread already. And i will defo get involved with those consulations this week.

 The final two?

I have copied and pasted in to my bundle the Vine and Forest appeal & Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking appeal & Spurling V Bradshaw appeal.  Are there any specific paragraphs to mention? The inital defence template mentions these cased but no specific paragraphs.

I had already included Excel v Wilkinson full transcript 

Coupon-mad

You need the Recorder Cohen judgment using the words I posted in a thread about it in May/June. Easy to find if you click on my profile and look at my discussions.

if you do nothing else this week do the Consultation and get your relatives to do the same.l before it closes Friday Morning.

Redx

Which ignavia linked a week ago !

Nosy

Coupon-mad said:

You need the Recorder Cohen judgment using the words I posted in a thread about it in May/June. Easy to find if you click on my profile and look at my discussions.

if you do nothing else this week do the Consultation and get your relatives to do the same.l before it closes Friday Morning.

This one?

The Consumer Rights Act 2015 (‘CRA’) sets out the requirements that must be met - whether a consumer pleads it or not - in order for there to be a legally enforceable contract between suppliers of goods and services, and consumers. Section 62 deals with the requirement for contract terms and notices to be fair, and states at (1) and (2) that unfair contract terms and notices shall not be binding on the consumer.

-          Schedule 2 of the CRA gives examples of terms which may be regarded as unfair.  Of particular relevance to the instant case, are examples 10 and 14. Example 10 states: ‘A term which has the object or effect of irrevocably binding the consumer to terms with which the consumer has had no real opportunity of becoming acquainted before the conclusion of the contract.’ It is submitted that the vague term ‘costs on an indemnity basis’ would fall foul of this example, given that the Defendant would have needed to research the meaning of that term, and would not have had the opportunity to do so prior to entering the parking area.

-          Example 14 states: ‘A term which has the object or effect of giving the trader the discretion to decide the price payable under the contract after the consumer has become bound by it, where no price or method of determining the price is agreed when the consumer becomes bound.’ It is abundantly clear that the Claimant in this case is attempting to hold the Defendant liable for a sum which is not specified (prominently or at all) on the signage, and of which the Claimant subsequently decides the quantum. On any reasonable construction, this cannot possibly pass the test of fairness and is incapable of binding the Defendant.

-          The term ‘costs on the indemnity basis’ is further identified in the Guidance to the CRA published by the Competition and Markets Authority, which states at 5.14.3 that ‘Other kinds of penal provisions which may be unfair are clauses saying that the business can ... claim its legal costs on an ‘indemnity’ basis, that is all costs, not just costs reasonably incurred. The words ‘indemnity’ and ‘indemnify’ are also objectionable as legal jargon – see the section on transparency in part 2 of the guidance.’

Le_Kirk

Nosy said:

Coupon-mad said:

You need the Recorder Cohen judgment using the words I posted in a thread about it in May/June. Easy to find if you click on my profile and look at my discussions.

if you do nothing else this week do the Consultation and get your relatives to do the same before it closes Friday Morning.

This one?

This the discussion to which @Coupon-mad was referring: -
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6279348/witness-statements-2-transcripts-re-parking-firms-false-costs-recorder-cohen-qc-judgment-2021/p1

Nosy

Thank you all again.

i have a total of  217 pages including all the exhibits with a total size of 7.5MB. 

the judge ordered that a single bundle os provided for all involved. now i need to add the claimants bundle to  mine so there is one paginated bundle. 

Does anyone know how to combine all together? 

or i can insert all to MS work and combine but i don't know how to ensure the page numbers are consistent throughout? any ideas?

Le_Kirk

Doesn't your notice of allocation state that the claimant is responsible for providing the combined bundle?