Defence help with NCP Ltd - BW Legal

Le_Kirk

There were large signs on the level, the signage had large and small print which would of have needed an unreasonable amount of time to read fully. 

Maybe you want to change this horrible grammatical aberration!

Coupon-mad

Why does no-one add 'and the driver' when it's obvious it will make sense to say so in #2?  Anyway here are some suggestions:

2.       It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and the driver of the vehicle in question but liability is denied.  

3.       The Defendant did enter the car park at the time specified by the Claimant. The car park had been used regularly by the Defendant for close to 30 years. On this day the Defendant noted that the barriers had been removed and a ANPR system had been newly installed which appeared to operate by calculating the stay, such that payment would be made on exit, just like many other such systems.  There were large signs on the level, the signage had large and small print which would of needed an unreasonable amount of time to read fully. Due to the exam starting soon the Defendant decided to go to the exam and use the system like he had in other car parks with ANPR systems. On their return they put in the car registration at the pay station and pressed the 'OK' button a few times until it told them to pay. At this point the defendant and paid the amount requested on his card as they always have done before.

You don't need any of this because the template defence (later on) already covers the added fake 'costs/admin/damages' issue in detail:

5.       The defendant also disagreed with the admin fees that were claimed for in their letter as they were large for a small cost. The defendant has always paid for car parks and believes that he has been treated unreasonably in this case. The defendant has had numerous unfair and unreasonable letters and some credit checks from the claimant before it has got to this stage. The credit checks were a surprise and a worry to the defendant.

pompeyobrien

Apologies Le_Kirk. I was dragged up, kicking and screaming...

Thanks CM, i will send the amended defence today. Hope your UNI pick up went well. 

Le_Kirk

pompeyobrien said:

Apologies Le_Kirk. I was dragged up, kicking and screaming...

No worries, it is important to be correct in all areas when submitting defences and witness statements to court.

pompeyobrien

Hi All

Just a quick query.

I have received a N24 General Form of Judgment or Order which states that the Claimant hasn't filed their DQ. I did receive the claimants DQ myself back in January around the same time i submitted mine. 
Is this normal? Or is it the courts backlogged? Or the Claimant being incompetent?
Just my curiosity making me ask.

D_P_Dance

The courts are log jammed.  The number of eviction cases will go through the roof, not to mention divorce, abuse, etc.

pompeyobrien

So i suppose my next question is if they don't file the DQ is that the end of the matter? Or do they have another chance later on down the line. 

As you say though, i am expecting it's the courts being overloaded and not the claimants error.

nosferatu1001

What does the order state wiull happen if they dont file? 
We dont know because you havent told us

Frankily their DQ matters little, as it will go to your court, but technically their claim can be struck out if they do not comply

Le_Kirk

The case should be struck out for failing to abide by court orders but, as @nosferatu1001 writes, it probably won't be.   Claimants (the so-called professionals) seem to be given more leeway than defendants.  If that had been you that had failed to submit your DQ in time, you can guarantee the claimant would have been granted a judgment in default.  Just proceed assuming the hearing will go ahead at some point.

Coupon-mad

They'll file it.  Nothing to see here.