Court Defence advice please

bob5678

Any feedback and advice gratefully received!

nosferatu1001

You have not followed other filed defences, to get an idea of language formatting or detail
No sub para numbering. If you NEED more para, each para has a normal integer. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and so on, renumbering the template
You dont say "can be " shown. State you will show evidence that... because you are an active party not passively waiting to be asked. 
FAR too m uch detail. You KNOW that the main facts are written in the WS. You are instructed in the template that this is a concise summary of useful facts. 

bob5678

nosferatu1001 said:

You have not followed other filed defences, to get an idea of language formatting or detail
No sub para numbering. If you NEED more para, each para has a normal integer. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and so on, renumbering the template
You dont say "can be " shown. State you will show evidence that... because you are an active party not passively waiting to be asked. 
FAR too m uch detail. You KNOW that the main facts are written in the WS. You are instructed in the template that this is a concise summary of useful facts. 

Many thanks - too much detail yes. I'm not sure how much detail to put. Shall I just consolidate all of those subpoints into one point?
ok that makes sense re. renumbering the template if needed, thanks
Will edit the "can be".

bob5678

I have edited down the detail into one paragraph - is this the right level of detail? Or shall I delete more?

I have renumbered from point 4 onwards. I am unclear on whether I should make the three paragraphs in point 3 their own numbered heading, or keep them all under 3.

And I understand I might not have the formal language right yet, so am going to cross-reference and make some amendments next

3. I first heard about this parking charge by post, in March 2019. Since then I have been harassed by a bombardment of letters and debt recovery threats.

The Notice to Keeper from the Claimant fails to comply with the strict requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4 and therefore the Claimant is incapable of holding the keeper liable.

Despite not being the driver, since receipt of the NTK, I have visited the site at various times of day and documented what the driver would have seen and not seen. In brief, it would have been dark, the signs are obscured, badly lit/unlit, badly placed. It is unclear where the boundaries are between public and private land and between adjoining areas of different private land.

4. The Premier Park signage was unfit for purpose as relates to the British Parking Association Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice, Version 7, as such no contract was made.

KeithP

Every paragraph needs a number.

Remove your paragraph 3 - it adds nothing.
To be clear - I mean remove just your para 3, not the unnumbered paras following.

A Defence is written in the third person. There is no place for the word 'I'.
The first sentence of your second unnumbered paragraph should therefore perhaps start like...
Despite not being the driver, since receipt of the NTK, the Defendant has visited the site...

Fruitcake

Everything needs to be in the third person. Only use the word "defendant", not "I". I have suggested a few changes as below.

2.  It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question but not the driver. Liability is denied. 

I deny being the driver at the time in question.

3. I first heard about this parking charge by post, in March 2019. Since then I have been harassed by a bombardment of letters and debt recovery threats.

The Notice to Keeper from the Claimant fails to comply with the strict requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4, paragraph 9 (2) (f), and therefore the Claimant is incapable of holding the keeper liable.

Despite not being the driver, since receipt of the NTK, I  have t The defendant has since visited the site at various times of day and documented what the driver would have seen and not seen. In brief, determined that it would have been dark, the signs are obscured, badly lit or / unlit, and badly inadequately placed. It is unclear where the boundaries are between public and private land and between adjoining areas of different private land.

I don't understand what you are trying to say here, but as already advised, inadequate signage is already included in the template defence. Perhaps you mean, does not comply with, instead of, was unfit for purpose as relates to.

If so, it won't hurt to leave it in.

4. The Premier Park signage was unfit for purpose as relates to the British Parking Association Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice, Version 7, as such no contract was made.

bob5678

KeithP said:

Every paragraph needs a number.

Remove your paragraph 3 - it adds nothing.
To be clear - I mean remove just your para 3, not the unnumbered paras following.

A Defence is written in the third person. There is no place for the word 'I'.
The first sentence of your second unnumbered paragraph should therefore perhaps start like...
Despite not being the driver, since receipt of the NTK, the Defendant has visited the site...

Thank you for this! Very helpful

bob5678

Amended draft.

Does the second line under 2. need to be it's own paragraph?

The facts as known to the Defendant:

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

The Defendant denies being the driver at the time in question.

3. The Notice to Keeper from the Claimant fails to comply with the strict requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4 and therefore the Claimant is incapable of holding the keeper liable.

4. Despite not being the driver, since receipt of the NTK, the Defendant has visited the site at various times of day and documented what the driver would have seen and not seen. In brief, it would have been dark, the signs are obscured, badly lit/unlit, badly placed. It is unclear where the boundaries are between public and private land and between adjoining areas of different private land.

5. The Premier Park signage was unfit for purpose as relates to the British Parking Association Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice, Version 7, as such no contract was made.

bob5678

Fruitcake said:

Everything needs to be in the third person. Only use the word "defendant", not "I". I have suggested a few changes as below.

2.  It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question but not the driver. Liability is denied. 

I deny being the driver at the time in question.

3. I first heard about this parking charge by post, in March 2019. Since then I have been harassed by a bombardment of letters and debt recovery threats.

The Notice to Keeper from the Claimant fails to comply with the strict requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4, paragraph 9 (2) (f), and therefore the Claimant is incapable of holding the keeper liable.

Despite not being the driver, since receipt of the NTK, I  have t The defendant has since visited the site at various times of day and documented what the driver would have seen and not seen. In brief, determined that it would have been dark, the signs are obscured, badly lit or / unlit, and badly inadequately placed. It is unclear where the boundaries are between public and private land and between adjoining areas of different private land.

I don't understand what you are trying to say here, but as already advised, inadequate signage is already included in the template defence. Perhaps you mean, does not comply with, instead of, was unfit for purpose as relates to.

If so, it won't hurt to leave it in.

4. The Premier Park signage was unfit for purpose as relates to the British Parking Association Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice, Version 7, as such no contract was made.

thank you - I cross-posted, will add your amendments now

Fruitcake

Just a tip. Most of the regulars will sometimes think of something new, or else think of something that needs changing after they have posted, and will go back to edit their previous wording. Indeed, I do this a lot. It is a good idea to go back over previous posts and look at them again if you see that they have been edited. That way you won't miss any additional information.

A post will tell you in the blue bar if and when a post was edited. Sometimes it is just for spilling and grommar errerz, but often it is also used for clarification.