Paintbrush vs DCB Legal - Writing Defence

Coupon-mad

OK but I see nothing to tell the Judge anything about this car park, maybe in #2 you should be adding that you neither admit nor deny that the vehicle was at the location stated and put the Claimant to strict proof of their claim and any alleged breach of terms because no evidence has been supplied.

Or am I wrong with that?  Can you add some knowledge of the car park and have you been sent any photos, such as in a SAR?

Paintbrush123

Coupon-mad said:

OK but I see nothing to tell the Judge anything about this car park, maybe in #2 you should be adding that you neither admit nor deny that the vehicle was at the location stated and put the Claimant to strict proof of their claim and any alleged breach of terms because no evidence has been supplied.

Or am I wrong with that?  Can you add some knowledge of the car park and have you been sent any photos, such as in a SAR?

I have the NTK which was listed a few pages back which documents my car arriving and leaving the car park (ANPR). I can add knowledge of the car park if advisable (with the little to no signage) - I think I was previously advised to save all this for my Witness Statement so I have deleted that part. My SAR is yet to be returned.

nosferatu1001

You were told to leave most for the WS. The entire point about editing 2 and 3 is to provide some bare facts to put your defence in context - there is of course a big difference between residential and retail poark and a multi story, between free parking, pay on exit or pay at start, etc. 

Paintbrush123

Thanks, I have tried to now keep it matter of fact. I now have a week or just under to submit: 

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question, but liability is denied. There were multiple possible drivers on an otherwise unremarkable date. The Defendant cannot recall who the driver was.

3. The Defendant is accused to have overstayed their time “permitted” within a free of charge carpark. The Claimant is stating the Defendant entered a contract with themselves despite no visible indication that this is the case. In addition to this, the driver has not been identified by the Claimant and although there is a provision in law under Schedule 4 the POFA2012 to recover unpaid parking charges from the vehicle’s keeper, the Claimant has made little to no effort to comply with the requirements of this act. Most notably, they failed to deliver any notice within the NTK that the keeper would become liable. (POFA2012, Schedule 9, paragraph 2, subparagraph f). As such, the Defendant has no liability in law.

KeithP

In para 3, the first two mentions of 'the Defendant' should be replaced with 'the driver'.

It is the driver that is accused of overstaying.
It is the driver who allegedly entered a contract.

Paintbrush123

KeithP said:

In para 3, the first two mentions of 'the Defendant' should be replaced with 'the driver'.

It is the driver that is accused of overstaying.
It is the driver who allegedly entered a contract.

Thanks a lot Keith, I did think it was weird when I was typing it ... and very obvious when you state it! Changed that now (on my version).  

Paintbrush123

Hi All, I have 4x questions relating to a few different topics within this process if you wouldn't mind, from Defence to SAR and documents they should be sending.

Q1. I made 1x very small change to my point 3 and shall be submitting this to CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk later today. I removed the bit of text that states there is no visible indication as I gathered that was part of the WS bit:

3. The driver is accused to have entered a contract with the Claimant and in turn, overstayed their time “permitted” within a free of charge carpark. In addition to this, the driver has not been identified by the Claimant and although there is a provision in law under Schedule 4 the POFA2012 to recover unpaid parking charges from the vehicle’s keeper, the Claimant has made little to no effort to comply with the requirements of this act. Most notably, they failed to deliver any notice within the NTK that the keeper would become liable. (POFA2012, Schedule 9, paragraph 2, subparagraph f). As such, the Defendant has no liability in law.

Q2. Reading through the steps, I have proactively downloaded and printed the Small Claims Track form to fill out and return. Is it best I just get this done ASAP? 

Q3. I have now also received back my SAR from Group Nexus. They have sent me over 3x PDFs - one being the NTK and the other 2x being identical but just worded differently. However they have accidentally attached 2x of the same PDF (dated 14th May 2015) and have not sent me over a document that is referenced within the text dated (27th April 2015). Can I do anything with this info? For anyone interested their email to me was the following: 

Dear Sir/Madam,

Thank you for your correspondence.

Please find attached copies of the requested documents.

Please be advised that this is not a pay and display car park.

We can confirm that your name and address details, along with details of the outstanding Charge, were passed to Debt Recovery Plus Ltd and Direct Collection Bailiffs Ltd who are our Collection Agents on the 29/05/2015 and 13/12/2019 respectively for the purposes of recovering the outstanding amount on this Charge. Q4. (please note that they have not included any of these letters from the debt collectors within the SAR ... should they have?)

You are able to find more information relating to how we manage data on our Privacy Policy which is located on our website: www.groupnexus.co.uk/privacy-policy.

Yours faithfully,

GroupNexus

KeithP

3. The driver is accused to have entered a contract with the Claimant and in turn, overstayed their time “permitted” within a free of charge carpark. In addition to this, the driver has not been identified by the Claimant and although there is a provision in law under Schedule 4 of the POFA2012 The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA2012) to recover unpaid parking charges from the vehicle’s keeper, the Claimant has made little to no effort to comply with the requirements of this act. Most notably, they failed to deliver any notice within the NTK Notice to Keeper that the keeper would become liable. (POFA2012, Schedule 4, paragraph 9, subparagraph 2f) Schedule 9, paragraph 2, subparagraph f). As such, the Defendant has no liability in law.

I've made a couple of slight changes.

Paintbrush123

KeithP said:

3. The driver is accused to have entered a contract with the Claimant and in turn, overstayed their time “permitted” within a free of charge carpark. In addition to this, the driver has not been identified by the Claimant and although there is a provision in law under Schedule 4 of the POFA2012 The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA2012) to recover unpaid parking charges from the vehicle’s keeper, the Claimant has made little to no effort to comply with the requirements of this act. Most notably, they failed to deliver any notice within the NTK Notice to Keeper that the keeper would become liable. (POFA2012, Schedule 4, paragraph 9, subparagraph 2f) Schedule 9, paragraph 2, subparagraph f). As such, the Defendant has no liability in law.

I've made a couple of slight changes.

Cheers Keith. 
Just to keep the trail up to date, reposting Q2, 3 & 4

Q2. Reading through the steps, I have proactively downloaded and printed the Small Claims Track form to fill out and return. Is it best I just get this done ASAP? 

Q3. I have now also received back my SAR from Group Nexus. They have sent me over 3x PDFs - one being the NTK and the other 2x being identical but just worded differently. However they have accidentally attached 2x of the same PDF (dated 14th May 2015) and have not sent me over a document that is referenced within the text dated (27th April 2015). Can I do anything with this info? For anyone interested their email to me was the following: 

Dear Sir/Madam,

Thank you for your correspondence.

Please find attached copies of the requested documents.

Please be advised that this is not a pay and display car park.

We can confirm that your name and address details, along with details of the outstanding Charge, were passed to Debt Recovery Plus Ltd and Direct Collection Bailiffs Ltd who are our Collection Agents on the 29/05/2015 and 13/12/2019 respectively for the purposes of recovering the outstanding amount on this Charge. Q4. (please note that they have not included any of these letters from the debt collectors within the SAR ... should they have?)

You are able to find more information relating to how we manage data on our Privacy Policy which is located on our website: www.groupnexus.co.uk/privacy-policy.

Yours faithfully,

GroupNexus

Le_Kirk

3. The driver is accused to have entered a contract with the Claimant and in turn, overstayed their time “permitted” within a free of charge carpark. 

This is clumsy, maybe: -

3. It is averred that the driver is accused to have entered a contract with the Claimant and in turn, overstayed the their “permitted” time within a free-of-charge car park.