DCB Legal Claim Form for CP Plus Ltd (Roadchef motorway services)

Coupon-mad

Yes. After the first sentence in 3b, add that:

The Defendant is unable to admit nor deny these allegations because the particulars are vague and no evidence, nor even a copy of the contract (I.e. the signage terms) was provided, contrary to the pre-action protocol for debt claims.

Elf2021

Coupon-mad said:

Yes. After the first sentence in 3b, add that:

The Defendant is unable to admit nor deny these allegations because the particulars are vague and no evidence, nor even a copy of the contract (I.e. the signage terms) was provided, contrary to the pre-action protocol for debt claims.

thank you 

3a) It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question, but liability is denied.

3b) The driver is alleged to have entered a contract with the Claimant and in turn, overstayed their time “permitted” within a free of charge carpark. The Defendant is unable to admit nor deny these allegations because the particulars are vague and no evidence, nor even a copy of the contract (i.e. the signage terms) was provided, contrary to the pre-action protocol for debt claims. 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 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 Notice to Keeper that the keeper would become liable. (POFA2012, Schedule 4, paragraph 9, subparagraph 2f). As such, the Defendant has no liability in law.

3c). In the Particulars of Claim ('POC') it is stated that the Defendant is liable as the driver or keeper, but the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence that the Defendant was also the driver. The Defendant cannot be held liable for the charges as the keeper of the vehicle.

3d). Following on from [b] & [c], where it is noted that the Claimant has elected not to comply with the 'keeper liability' requirements set out in POFA, Claimant has included a clear falsehood in their POC which were signed under a statement of truth by the Claimant's legal representative who should know (as the Claimant undoubtedly does) that it is untrue to state that the Defendant is 'liable as keeper'.  This can never be the case with a CP Plus Ltd T/A Groupnexus have never used the POFA 2012 wording, of their own volition.  Not only does the POC include this misleading untruth, but the Claimant has also added an unidentified sum in false 'damages' to enhance the claims.  So sparse is their statement of case that the Claimant has failed to even state any facts about the alleged breach or the amount of the parking charge that was on the signage, because it cannot have been over £100. The claimant has failed to provide a schedule of loss or breakdown and/or to adequately particularise the sums claimed in the amount of £360.84. The claimant is put to strict proof and the defendant will respond to each individual loss claimed upon clarification of the same.  Defendant has excluded the £50 Court Fee & £50 Legal representative's costs from the Total amount for the purposes of this defence point. 

Coupon-mad

Hmmm, I’d make ‘In addition to this’ a new paragraph and forget the complicated 3a,b,c numbering and just renumber every paragraph in sequential 1, 2, 3 numbering.  

Also your last paragraph there is too long so split that up too - think of the Judge and his or her eyesight! Make it easier to read.

Elf2021

Coupon-mad said:

Hmmm, I’d make ‘In addition to this’ a new paragraph and forget the complicated 3a,b,c numbering and just renumber every paragraph in sequential 1, 2, 3 numbering.  

Also your last paragraph there is too long so split that up too - think of the Judge and his or her eyesight! Make it easier to read.

Modified the paragraphs 
The only reason I was using 3 a, b, c etc. was so that I didn't need to go through the rest of the defence and change all the paragraph numbering for fear of changing a reference in the text, but you are right this looks better

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

4) The driver is alleged to have entered a contract with the Claimant and in turn, overstayed their time “permitted” within a free of charge carpark. The Defendant is unable to admit nor deny these allegations because the particulars are vague and no evidence, nor even a copy of the contract (i.e. the signage terms) was provided, contrary to the pre-action protocol for debt claims.

5) 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 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 Notice to Keeper that the keeper would become liable. (POFA2012, Schedule 4, paragraph 9, subparagraph 2f). As such, the Defendant has no liability in law.

6) In the Particulars of Claim ('POC') it is stated that the Defendant is liable as the driver or keeper, but the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence that the Defendant was also the driver. The Defendant cannot be held liable for the charges as the keeper of the vehicle.

7) Following on from [5] & [6], where it is noted that the Claimant has elected not to comply with the 'keeper liability' requirements set out in POFA, Claimant has included a clear falsehood in their POC which was signed under a statement of truth by the Claimant's legal representative who should know (as the Claimant undoubtedly does) that it is untrue to state that the Defendant is 'liable as keeper'.  This can never be the case with CP Plus Ltd T/A Groupnexus, who have never used the POFA 2012 wording, of their own volition. 

8) Not only does the POC include this misleading untruth, but the Claimant has also added an unidentified sum in false 'damages' to enhance the claims.  So sparse is their statement of case that the Claimant has failed to even state any facts about the alleged breach or the amount of the parking charge that was on the signage, because it cannot have been over £100. The claimant has failed to provide a schedule of loss or breakdown and/or to adequately particularise the sums claimed in the amount of £360.84. The claimant is put to strict proof and the defendant will respond to each individual loss claimed upon clarification of the same.  Defendant has excluded the £50 Court Fee & £50 Legal representative's costs from the Total amount for the purposes of this defence point. 

@Coupon-mad your help is very much appreciated 

Elf2021

I am going to submit this defence as part of the template today by email, before I go into MCOL and click on the "start defence" button is there anything I should specifically say in there because I won't be copying and pasting this defence as per the advice on the forum, but emailing it - should I refer to the "email" in there to ensure they check for it?

and just to be 100% sure - it's this email as per the newbie thread 
CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk 

Jenni_D

I've never done it so I can't explain the exact process (have you read back in the NEWBIES about the court process guide?) ... all I do know is that you put absolutely nothing in the Defence box; not  thing, not even a dot.

Redx

As above , just email it to the ccbcaq email address , nothing else

If you write , I have emailed it , those 4 words are your defence !!!  Not what you want at all

MCOL is used to do the AOS online , then it's read only where you check the claim history weekly , no more typing on there after the AOS was done

An email auto receipt will come to your inbox folder or spam folder , so check both

Then check next week that the defence has been accepted and logged

Don't ruin it now by scrawling in the online defence box after all the hard work you have done

Elf2021

Jenni_D said:

I've never done it so I can't explain the exact process (have you read back in the NEWBIES about the court process guide?) ... all I do know is that you put absolutely nothing in the Defence box; not  thing, not even a dot.

yea I read the newbie thread and it did say put nothing in the defence box - just wanted to be 100% sure so that I don't damage everything I have already done, and find I should have done something else on the MCOL site 

Elf2021

Redx said:

As above , just email it to the ccbcaq email address , nothing else

If you write , I have emailed it , those 4 words are your defence !!!  Not what you want at all

MCOL is used to do the AOS online , then it's read only where you check the claim history weekly , no more typing on there after the AOS was done

An email auto receipt will come to your inbox folder or spam folder , so check both

Then check next week that the defence has been accepted and logged

Don't ruin it now by scrawling in the online defence box after all the hard work you have done

perfect thank you - just wanted to be 100% sure that the email is enough... this one CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk because I saw a different one on another thread - but this is the one that Coupon-mad and KeithP refer to.. so going with that, and then on to the next stage..

I emailed Tracy Baitup back - but not had any response at all 
I wrote a warning review on trustpilot telling people not to use Roadchef - but I can't see it even though I had an email saying it was posted..

patient_dream

It's on TP