CRA 2015 s62 10 Defence - No real opportunity of becoming acquainted with T&Cs

FizzyCharlie

Okay, an overview of what happened - The was in the County Court at York, C/N H3KF50F5

I believe it was Deputy District Judge Teeman but I will confirm once the order comes through...

It went a little something like....

Judge: Welcome and straight in at the Claimant about the Particulars of the Case (PotC) (picture attached) - Not happy, no where near enough detail and didn't explain anything. Anything to say?

Claimant: Mentioned template defence about 10 times in one speech (Judge didn't even respond to this) Claimed that the PotC were fine, if they weren't then Defendant wouldn't have been able to make a defence, should have appealed or something (couldn't follow everything he was saying, in some points technical in others just seemed to ramble) Said it had got this far and other Judges hadn't had a problem with it.

Judge: Not interested, quoted a few guidelines (I'm afraid I didn't understand or catch) but the upshot was the case was being struck out due to lack of detail in the case. I think she said something along the lines of that the Money Claim Online service had a character count of 1080 so they should have made use of it to fully expand their PotC. Judge sounded pretty annoyed and said that it was happening all too often (so yea, they seem to be getting short with these chancer!) Did the Claimant have anything to say?

Claimant: Something about a white book and being struck out should be the last course of action - Can I appeal?

Judge: Nope, no leave to appeal, it's a waste of the courts time (not sure if this was in reference to the case as a whole. I'm hoping so and the rest of the work I put into the WS wasn't wasted!) I think the Judge then just wanted to give me a chance to talk as I hadn't said anything by the. TBH it went so quick (I reckon 7min in total - all I could say was something like, 'No, I understand'! Then Judge signs off by saying the order will be written up and sent out... goodbye!

It was a good result, considering I was second guessing everything, thinking 'why would they come this far if they didn't have anything' but just proves they really are just a bunch of chancers. They'd lost the case from day one and didn't even know it! I wish I'd mentioned the costs and LIP charges but TBH at that points I was so surprised I just didn't want to say anything to mess it up! Will consider the claim against them once I've got the order and see if I've still got the energy...

So, good work everyone, a real team effort and worth it at that. It's certainly not about the money, more about what is right, not necessarily in a contractual sense, but just common sense and decency. Hopefully others will take this on as well!

95Rollers

Great work. I see they went for the "template defence" attack   You were well prepared - did your homework, were proactive and put the work in. Maybe the just saw your statement and skimmed through it, saw the general points and arguments and looked at theirs which was diabolical and made her mind up subconsciously before beginning and their rep's poor conduct was the final nail. It could of been the case if your witness statement and evidence were sparse then you might have had to sell things a bit more. That is just my impression based on what I've read and my own experiences in interviews and meetings.

Coupon-mad

Those POC are particularly templatey waffle and they don't even explain the sums of money for the PCN as opposed to the false damages.  It is incoherent as a statement of case and this Judge was right.

Good Judge!  ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST!

FizzyCharlie

Just to confirm, I think I got the right end of the stick...! It was District Judge Mark though instead...

Coupon-mad

Very good to read!  Parking claims are a farce.  If only more people realised they'd win.

D_P_Dance

They have wasted your time, now consider wating theirs, read this

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/legal-system/small-claims/making-a-small-claim/