About to file my defence

Hade

Hi,
A claim was brought against me by VCS for a parking charge.
Thing is, I was not the driver. I do know for a fact that the driver submitted the 'transfer of liability' form and named me. Since the didn't know the keeper's details (it was a borrowed car), they just entered 'REDACTED' into all the boxes for the keepers details (the keeper was supposed to be the one completing the form!).
VCS then took the bait and came after me instead of the keeper in the mistaken belief that it was the keeper that transferred liability to me.
After successfully having my defaulted case set aside, I have been given a week to file a defence.
My defence is based around the fact that the keeper clearly never submitted the keeper liability form as it contains false info (see attached image). I brought this to their attention in an email and they ignored.
I'd be really grateful if you guys could take a look over it and let me know if it looks right? Do you think I have a fighting chance?

IN THE COUNTY COURT

Claim No.: XXXXXX

Between

Vehicle Control Services Ltd

(Claimant) 

- and -  

XXXXXX                  

 (Defendant)

____________________

DEFENCE

____________________

1.       The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.  It is denied that a contract was entered into - by conduct or otherwise - whereby it was ‘agreed’ to pay a ‘parking charge’ and it is denied that this Claimant (understood to have a bare licence as managers) has standing to sue, nor to form contracts in their own name at the location.

 

The facts as known to the Defendant:

2. It is withheld that Defendant was not the registered keeper nor the driver of the vehicle in question at the time and date of the alleged contravention.

 3. The defendant only became aware of the allegation against himself after receiving repeated demands for payment from the claimant and their associated debt collection agencies.

4. It is a fact that the defendant felt intimidated and suffered intense stress after receiving demands for increasing sums of money from multiple parties relating to this alleged debt. This stress has manifested in significant physiological problems which caused the defendant to seek medical assistance.

5. Section 8 (2)(e)(ii) of the Protection Of Freedoms Act 2012 section 4 states:

“if the keeper was not the driver of the vehicle, to notify the creditor of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and to pass the notice on to the driver;”

It is asserted that the registered keeper of the vehicle in question did not notify the claimant with the name and address of the defendant.

The defendant denies receiving a copy of the notice from the keeper which he would expect to receive if he had been identified as the driver by the keeper. 

6. It is a matter of fact that the contact form used by the claimant to collect the name and address of driver can be accessed by information found on the document which is attached to the outside of the vehicle windscreen. Therefore is asserted that the form can be submitted by any individual with momentary access to this document, which was left unattended and could be accessed from a public road.

7. It is asserted that the individual who submitted the defendants name and address via the liability notifier form entered false identifying information, the full contents of this form submission was obtained by a SAR (Subject Access Request) and has been submitted with this defence.

8. It is asserted that the claimant failed to confirm the identity of the liability notifier (the individual who provided them with the defendants’ name and address.) and has therefore been deliberately misled.

9. By failing to verify the details provided in the liability notifier form and acting on them, It is asserted that the claimant has been negligent.

10. On 29th September 2020, the defendant contacted the claimant to draw their attention to the false information submitted via their liability notifier form. By failing to verify this information and continuing on to submit the information to the court as evidence of the defendants’ guilt, it is asserted that they have been further negligent.

 

 

In the matter of costs, the Defendant seeks:

11.   (a) standard witness costs for attendance at Court, pursuant to CPR 27.14, 

(b) Compensation for the stress, inconvenience and disruption to business caused.

(c) Compensation for accrued court costs

(c) That any hearing is not vacated but continues as a costs hearing, in the event of a late Notice of Discontinuance.  The Defendant seeks a finding of unreasonable behaviour in the pre-and post-action phases by this Claimant and will seek further costs pursuant to CPR 46.5.

12.   The Defendant invites the court to find that this exaggerated claim is entirely without merit and to dismiss the claim. 

 

Statement of Truth

I believe that the facts stated in this defence are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

Redx

2 doesn't make sense , the word withheld seems incongruous

It seems to me that your main defence is that you are neither the keeper or the driver so have no liability whatsoever and the wrong person has been issued with a court claim

Your evidence (not defence) is the incorrect details that led to this , by third parties

nosferatu1001

I would have thought defending on the basis you are neither the keeper nor have you ever driven the car would be best, just prove you weren't there that day, for example,e. 

Redx

Seems to me that the OP has set aside a CCJ and is filing all the documents , especially the defence , Exhibits and the witness statement against the original claim

So all at once

In theory VCS issued the MPC to the driver , somehow they or somebody has told VCS false details , the OP may have received a NTD in the post , or did not receive it , but would never receive an NTK PCN because they are not the RK , I suspect they have set aside a CCJ

So a confused dot com OP ?   , definitely !!

Umkomaas

Clever Trevor strikes again and makes untangling this much more difficult!

Hade

Sorry I missed a lot of detail out.
Yes, I ended up with a CCJ as I ignored the NTD and subsequent demands from VCS and their bailiffs (big mistake in hindsight). I was working away when the notice before claim arrived and became aware when it was too late. I got the CCJ set aside.

I have put together the defence above. Also above is a copy of the liability transfer form that I obtained by sending a SAR.
Long story short, instead of the keeper naming the driver in a transfer of liability form, I suspect the actual driver submitted the form with my details in to absolve himself of any responsibility. This happened around the time I was having a major business dispute (a business partner was stealing from our company and I was heading towards taking legal action against him. He had a vendetta against me. I have no evidence it was him, but I'm pretty sure it was him).
I don't have evidence I was elsewhere as I was probably in the office at that time. I had a separate designated private parking bay down the end of the same road.

Hope that clears things up a bit! Would still appreciate some advice!

Redx

My advice stands , stick to the facts , not assumptions , you are neither keeper or driver , so the claimant has issued the claim against the wrong person , the wrong person is in the dock , so fatal to their case, which they must prove and clearly cannot

The exhibits are your evidence , proof of your assertion that they have no legal claim against you the defendant

Do not assume what others may have done or not , it's hearsay and nothing to do with the VCS flawed claim against you

They failed POFA

They failed to identify the driver

They have accepted a false instrument and claimed against an innocent party

Adapt your defence accordingly and repost

Coupon-mad

Add a witness statement in the first person (dated and signed by you under a statement of truth) as well as a defence, saying this:

Instead of the keeper naming the driver in a transfer of liability form, I suspect the actual driver submitted the form with my details in to absolve himself of any responsibility. This happened around the time I was having a major business dispute (a business partner was stealing from our company and I was heading towards taking legal action against him. He had a vendetta against me. I have no evidence it was him, but I'm pretty sure it was him).

I don't have evidence I was elsewhere as I was probably in the office at that time. I had a separate designated private parking bay down the end of the same road.

Hade

Thank you both for your help with this, I really appreciate it!
I have created a separate witness statement document, in the required format.
I trimmed quite a bit off the defence, but I am worried they might try to say that they replaced the names in the form with 'REDACTED' for privacy or something? or is there no risk of this?

The bulk of both documents is below:

____________________

WITNESS STATEMENT

____________________

1. I, XXX of XXX will say as follows:

2. Instead of the keeper naming the driver in a transfer of liability form, I suspect the actual driver submitted the form with my details in to absolve himself of any responsibility. This happened around the time I was having a major business dispute. A business partner was embezzling money from our company and I was collecting evidence to build a case against him. I had sought legal advice and confronted him. He appeared to target me anf had a vendetta against me. I have no evidence that this parking incident was connected to him, but I have a strong suspicion it was him.

I don't have evidence I was elsewhere as I was probably in the office at that time. I had a separate designated private parking bay down the end of the same road.

Statement of Truth

I believe that the facts stated in this defence are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

____________________

DEFENCE

____________________

1. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.  It is denied that the defendant entered into any contract with the claimant and it is maintained that the defendant has been wrongly identified as the driver.

 

The facts as known to the Defendant:

2. The defendant was not the registered keeper nor the driver of the vehicle in question at the time and date of the alleged contravention.

 3. The defendant only became aware of the allegation against himself after receiving correspondence sent to his home address.

4.The individual who submitted the defendants name and address via the liability notifier form entered false identifying information, the full contents of this form submission was obtained by a SAR (Subject Access Request) and has been submitted as evidence to support this defence.

5. It is asserted that the claimant failed to confirm the identity of the liability notifier (the individual who provided them with the defendants’ name and address.) and therefore failed to meet the requirements of POFA 2012 Schedule 4.

6. By failing to verify the details provided in the liability notifier form and acting on them, It is asserted that the claimant has been negligent and wilfully misled.

7. On 29th September 2020, the defendant contacted the claimant to draw their attention to the false information submitted via their liability notifier form. By failing to verify this information and continuing on to submit the information to the court as evidence of the defendants’ guilt, it is asserted that they have been further negligent.

 

In the matter of costs, the Defendant seeks:

11.   (a) standard witness costs for attendance at Court, pursuant to CPR 27.14, 

(b) Compensation for the stress, inconvenience and disruption to business caused.

(c) Compensation for accrued court costs

(c) That any hearing is not vacated but continues as a costs hearing, in the event of a late Notice of Discontinuance.  The Defendant seeks a finding of unreasonable behaviour in the pre-and post-action phases by this Claimant and will seek further costs pursuant to CPR 46.5.

12.   The Defendant invites the court to find that this exaggerated claim is entirely without merit and to dismiss the claim. 

 

Statement of Truth

I believe that the facts stated in this defence are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

KeithP

The first Statement of Truth should start...
I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.

Redx

Looking better , but your statement of truth for the WS says defence , when it's not a defence , horses for courses

As for the Defence , it makes a statement of fact in 4 , but you are assuming the sentence is correct , you state in your WS that you can only surmise what happened , but have no proof as such

So 4 seems incorrect to me , in that it is an assumption , not established fact

I would change 4 to mention something similar , but let your WS do the talking and assuming , allowing 4 to open the door

All you can do is present the facts , who redacted what is their problem not yours , all you know is that it wasn't you and that is all you know , it's hearsay unless proven. The person who filled in the form isn't present in court , so cannot be questioned

It is not your problem if the driver put redacted , or if VCS redacted the details

Keep it simple , you are not the registered keeper or Keeper , you were not the driver , you have no legal liability !!

Let your defence be legal arguments and facts

Let your witness statement plus exhibits elaborate on the facts

Don't mix one with the other , but let a defence open the door

The statement of truth is slightly different wording