Excel Parking Letter of Claim

Jenni_D

Rarely is the landowner contract irrelevant - what's so special about your case that makes this so?

Bonez257

Jenni_D said:

Rarely is the landowner contract irrelevant - what's so special about your case that makes this so?

I never received a Customer License Agreement and it mentions a document being signed by 2 Directors? Was this supposed to be sent to me from the Claimant?

Bonez257

Has anyone had a look at the WS to see if its good enough? Any feedback would be appreciated.

Thanks

Le_Kirk

Bonez257 said:

Has anyone had a look at the WS to see if its good enough? Any feedback would be appreciated.

Some suggestions: -
3.  To my knowledge.....
Upon entry to the car park .....
... covered in graffiti which is illegible
... and is also ineptly high up ........  [Not sure what you meant here maybe extremely]
In (5) you talk abut not seeing the sign "to the left of the entry" but if you didn't see it how do you know it is there?  You need to explain this a bit better so the judge understands.
In (7) you talk about receiving your Subject Access Request (SAR).  You do not receive a SAR, you submit it and you receive data from the request.  The information in this paragraph clearly explains how you know about signs that you "didn't see" in your paragraph (5).  Why not combine the two paragraphs so that it makes more sense and is logical rather than jumping backwards and forwards.
The sign yet still has some marks......

nicestrawb

Why leave out the landowner contract? If it is redacted and they are not sharing the information with you or the courts, how are you or the courts meant to ascertain whether there is a contract in place? It could have been signed by Mickey mouse. I believe there was a case recently where it was decided that redacted contracts are basically useless and proof of nothing in a court. Are you saying you requested it and they refused to supply it?.... if so, that's even more relevant and you should definitely be mentioning that...

1505grandad

For consistency:-

In the Exhibits Index  -  "Judgment" in this context does not contain a middle "e"  -  check the actual exhibits.

Bonez257

Thank you everyone. Will amend this asap

Bonez257

nicestrawb said:

Why leave out the landowner contract? If it is redacted and they are not sharing the information with you or the courts, how are you or the courts meant to ascertain whether there is a contract in place? It could have been signed by Mickey mouse. I believe there was a case recently where it was decided that redacted contracts are basically useless and proof of nothing in a court. Are you saying you requested it and they refused to supply it?.... if so, that's even more relevant and you should definitely be mentioning that...

I never requested it. It just confused me as I don't know what its referring to. It mentions a document being signed but I have no idea what this document is or what it's referring to. I didn't want to keep it in not knowing what its about and not having any answers if the judge questioned me about it

Jenni_D

Why not post a copy of it here so the folks can help advise?

Bonez257

This is the section on the WS supplied by @jrhys

Redacted Landowner Contract

15.       The Claimant has appended a redacted ‘Customer License Agreement’ which has little or no probative value and which offends against the rules of evidence. The ‘Client’ signatory of the ‘Agreement’ could be anyone, even a stranger to the land, and the Claimant provides no evidence that the ‘Client’ is the landowner.

16.       It is also clear that the document has not been signed by two Directors, nor by one Director in the presence of attesting witnesses, and as such cannot – according to the Companies Act – be considered a validly executed contract. The network of contracts are key in these cases, since the parking charges are argued to be contractual and the authority to sue visitors must flow from the landowner, not an agent.

17.       In the recent Court of Appeal case of Hancock v Promontoria (Chestnut) Limited [2020] EWCA Civ 907 the Court of Appeal are now clear that most redactions are improper where the Court are being asked to interpret the contract. https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2020/907.html

Ref. paras 74 & 75 ''...The document must in all normal circumstances be placed before the court as a whole. Seldom, if ever, can it be appropriate for one party unilaterally to redact provisions in a contractual document which the court is being asked to construe, merely on grounds of confidentiality...confidentiality alone cannot be good reason for redacting an otherwise relevant provision...''