Claim Form - Defence for My Residential Parking

Coupon-mad

Well what's the issue in understanding what I said to put in the defence?  This is their claim to prove, not yours!

limmylom

I think it was just the terminology “at all material times” I didn’t quite get. 

And the fact that it is true that the permit was not clearly visible (and probably slipped to the  floor on one occasion), their photo evidence should easily prove that my permit was actually not in fact visible at all times. 

Coupon-mad

And the fact that it is true that the permit was not clearly visible (and probably slipped to the  floor on one occasion), their photo evidence should easily prove that my permit was actually not in fact visible at all times. 

But it's not a fact ('probably' is not a fact, and it's more likely that the permit was PROBABLY still visible through the windscreen...).

It is not a fact if they can't prove it with unequivocal photo evidence. This is their claim to prove and you will be astonished how shoddy OBSERVICES photos are.  They are among the worst for minimal evidence and useless signage.  Typical ex-clamper mentality of entrapping drivers and takiing quick photos then running away.

limmylom

OK, I'd love to get your thoughts on the draft below.  I think I'm write in extending paragraph 3 into several additional numbers/paragraphs according to my defence.  Provided this is acceptable, can I use the remaining template unaltered (besides re-numbering)? 

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

 

3. The Defendant is a leasehold property owner of xxxxx for the last 12 years for which the residential carpark in question belongs to. The lease explicitly provides the defendant the right to use the carpark and at no instance in the lease does it state the defendant is required to display a permit. It is stated “A right to park a motor vehicle or cycle in one of the spaces provided for that purpose on the property if one be available” with no caveat.

4. Even if the court does not agree the defendant has an unfettered right to park, in the alternative, the permit was always displayed as a courtesy and not an obligation, and at all material times it was visible on the dashboard as a loose permit, not secured to the windscreen itself and at times, possibly only visible from a certain direction of sight.

5.  As a leaseholder with title, the Defendant claims primacy of contract and right to park in accordance with the lease that cannot be overridden by the Claimant’s cardboard sign. It is also averred that there was no clear signage to form a contract between the claimant and the defendant.   The sole sign displayed on the entrance was not sufficient for a carpark of some thirty-five plus spaces and the terms and conditions of the parking offer by the claimant were intelligible and were not in bold and clear type, being significantly smaller in size than the majority of the signage.  It cannot be said that a clear offer was made by the claimant in this instance.

Coupon-mad

Yes, that's fine.  I'd just switch this round like this:

 It is stated, without caveat: “A right to park a motor vehicle or cycle in one of the spaces provided for that purpose on the property if one be available”.

limmylom

Coupon-mad said:

Yes, that's fine.  I'd just switch this round like this:

 It is stated, without caveat: “A right to park a motor vehicle or cycle in one of the spaces provided for that purpose on the property if one be available”.

I took your advice, switching the wording.  I also want to write a letter of complaint to the housing association with a hope they may prompt the parking company to cancel the claim. Can I threated them with legal action and if so, what specifically? Should I also provide them with my defence?

Le_Kirk

You should complain to the housing association if they have any hold over the PPC.  You could "threaten" the housing company by sending them a letter before action, laying out what you expect them to do and giving them 7 days to respond but be prepared to carry out your "threat" if they do not accede to your requirements.  What do you want them to do and why do you think they can do this?  If it is just a way of cranking up the pressure on them I doubt it will work.

limmylom

Le_Kirk said:

You should complain to the housing association if they have any hold over the PPC.  You could "threaten" the housing company by sending them a letter before action, laying out what you expect them to do and giving them 7 days to respond but be prepared to carry out your "threat" if they do not accede to your requirements.  What do you want them to do and why do you think they can do this?  If it is just a way of cranking up the pressure on them I doubt it will work.

Thank you. I just want them to instruct the parking company to stop the claim.  I think they can do this because the parking company was hired by the housing association. I could do a letter before action but I don't know what I could claim against them.

Le_Kirk

limmylom said:

Le_Kirk said:

You should complain to the housing association if they have any hold over the PPC.  You could "threaten" the housing company by sending them a letter before action, laying out what you expect them to do and giving them 7 days to respond but be prepared to carry out your "threat" if they do not accede to your requirements.  What do you want them to do and why do you think they can do this?  If it is just a way of cranking up the pressure on them I doubt it will work.

Thank you. I just want them to instruct the parking company to stop the claim.  I think they can do this because the parking company was hired by the housing association. I could do a letter before action but I don't know what I could claim against them.

In which case, a strong complaint but make sure you have good grounds for asking for it to be cancelled.

ParkingMad

The terms and conditions of the parking offer by the claimant were intelligible and were not in bold and clear type

Did you mean they were unintelligible?