Received County Court Claims form

JasonHar1

Next draft, getting there?:
3. The Defendant avers that there is no liability as there was no contractual breach. The contract was frustrated as a direct result of the poor design of the Claimant’s online parking payment application (app).

 

4. In addition, the Defendant avers that recovery costs are included in the original PCN amount of £100.00, otherwise that £100.00 would be entirely set to penalise the Defendant, which would be unlawful. Therefore, there is no liability for the additional £60.00 recovery charge.

Coupon-mad

Yes but I'd want to know more about this and what happened, i.e. did the app fail, or take too long but finally work, did the driver give up and leave, etc?

Next draft, getting there?:
3. The Defendant avers that there is no liability as there was no contractual breach. The contract was frustrated as a direct result of the poor design of the Claimant’s online parking payment application (app).

JasonHar1

This was in an earlier draft but was removed following a suggestion to simplify the defence statement and put the detail in the witness statement:

The Defendant completed all the required information in the forms in the app, to pay for the parking and believed in good faith that the transaction was complete. The poor design of the app placed a confirm button out of sight, off the bottom of the screen, which was not visible without scrolling down. There was nothing to suggest that the Defendant was required to scroll down to the bottom of the screen to complete the transaction and the Defendant reasonably assumed that it was complete.

Coupon-mad

That should stay in but never use the word 'assumed':

reasonably assumed concluded that it was complete.

JasonHar1

How is this? The rest of the statement is unaltered template.

3. The Defendant avers that there is no liability as there was no contractual breach. The contract was frustrated as a direct result of the poor design of the Claimant’s online parking payment application (app).

4. The Defendant completed all the required information in the forms in the app, to pay for the parking and believed in good faith that the transaction was complete. The poor design of the app placed a confirm button out of sight, off the bottom of the screen, which was not visible without scrolling down. There was nothing to suggest that the Defendant was required to scroll down to the bottom of the screen to complete the transaction and the Defendant reasonably concluded that it was complete.

5. In addition, the Defendant avers that recovery costs are included in the original PCN amount of £100.00, otherwise that £100.00 would be entirely set to penalise the Defendant, which would be unlawful. Therefore, there is no liability for the additional £60.00 recovery charge.

Coupon-mad

It's fine.  You don't really need #5 because the template covers the added £60 but what you say there is correct.

JasonHar1

Thanks, I'd wondered if 5 was useful just to increase the emphasis on their illegal charges?

Coupon-mad

I like the way it's written (a concise summary about the scam £60) so I would leave it in, then renumber the template points below it to run concurrently, of course.

JasonHar1

Thank you. I'll submit that closer to the due time and I'll work on my witness statement.

nosferatu1001

Why wait? Wanting to tempt fate?

if it's done, just submit it