PCN Request for disclosure

StudentatLaw

Coupon-mad said:

It is a small claim so s31 won't apply. 

I see what you are saying that it is not allocated to track yet, but don't hold your breath, you won't get disclosure.  This is just from my experience and as I say, I am not legally qualified.

Yeah, I agree, there's certainly no hope from C's legal reps from the tone of their emails. But, I thought it was a relevant point and perhaps one worth noting in the defence, particularly since the burden of proof is on them to prove its non-relevance at this stage (prior to track allocation). I'll do some digging at some stage to see if there are any examples of this argument being raised in court. 

Redx

there are less than a handful of legally qualified people on here, any of which may respond with ltigation knowledge, but MSE isnt a legal advice forum , legal beagles is, as it says in my signature

if they help and assist your knowledge (and ours) then great

I wont name them but if you read their posts it will become apparent they know this topic from a legal P O V , OR MOST OF IT

one hasnt posted in a while , two have

StudentatLaw

Thanks both. I will do so digging and let you know what I come back with. I do think there is an argument here though. 
Will come back to you once I have something/have prepared a defence if that's OK. 
Many thanks. 

Coupon-mad

See what @Johnersh thinks...he is a solicitor poster here.

Le_Kirk

Mediation
Mediator: Claimant, how much are you prepared to accept?
Claimant: £FULL
Mediator: Defendant, how much are you prepared to pay?
Defendant: £ZERO
Mediator: End of mediation!

Johnersh

Look if you've asked for the contract and C has not supplied it, then plead "it is neither admitted nor denied that there is a relevant contract."

If applicable, perhaps add, "the claimant has failed to disclose copies of the contract despite multiple requests to do so. The defendant reserves the right to raise further legal argument in connection with the contract when it is supplied."

It really irritates me that MCOL is used as a basis to serve 3 line particulars with scant detail and to circumvent the usual cpr requirement that relevant contractual terms must be set out within or supplied with the particulars. 

The o/p should be warned that in small claims a fair degree of pragmatism is used, which doesn't always accord with what you might expect the rules to require. 

nosferatu1001

Indeed. I think that may be where the OP and regulars are seeing slight conflict

weve seen the actual pragmatic side if SCT cases a fair amount, and the op likely hasnt. 

OP - if you use this forum as a resource to search, like a bad lexisnexus maybe, you'll find cpr31 was done to death years ago, to no avail
the firms just delay, stating why they don't think disclosure applies, meanwhile your deadline will not be extended a d so you file a defence anyway. Same as everyone. Then it gets allocated - and in 5 years of posting allocation has in 100% of cases been SCT - and then cpr31 dies to applu
You
will
get 
nowhere. 

You came here fir advice. You've been given it. You can argue but it makes !!!!!! all practical difference - the claim will proceed no matter what we say here - and all you do is annoy those who have been here awhile and have good experience of how this will go. 

You stated they knew who the driver was. Be precise. Was a name and serviceable address given? You should by now know why this question is being asked 😊

StudentatLaw

Johnersh said:

Look if you've asked for the contract and C has not supplied it, then plead "it is neither admitted nor denied that there is a relevant contract."

If applicable, perhaps add, "the claimant has failed to disclose copies of the contract despite multiple requests to do so. The defendant reserves the right to raise further legal argument in connection with the contract when it is supplied."

It really irritates me that MCOL is used as a basis to serve 3 line particulars with scant detail and to circumvent the usual cpr requirement that relevant contractual terms must be set out within or supplied with the particulars. 

The o/p should be warned that in small claims a fair degree of pragmatism is used, which doesn't always accord with what you might expect the rules to require. 

Thank you. 

StudentatLaw

Hi all

I put up a post a while back requesting some support prior to a DR hearing for my father : https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6219989/pcn-request-for-disclosure/p4

A little late, but wanted to post an update:

I was able to get 2/3 PCNs dismissed on the basis of:
- one PCN not being particularised adequately in the PoC
- another PCN for inadequate evidence

The only reason that the third PCN was not dismissed was that we did not have time to file a WS - which would have provided a copy to the IPC Code of Practice, of which a provision was breached. Judge did not want to 'take our word' on what the parking code said.

Not an ideal result but overall quite happy with the outcome, especially as it was my first experience through the civil court system (I am a future trainee at a global commercial firm, so it's quite exciting to have this experience very early on). 

StudentatLaw

Sorry, just realised this is the wrong forum! Doesn't appear to be a way to delete it, my apologies.