URGENT HELP NEEDED. Court Claim- defence due tomorrow

Redx

superdrpanda said:

would it make my defence weaker if I don't get the documents from SAR in time ? 

Not if 2 & 3 are worded correctly , the SAR reply is of more use at the WS stage in a few months time

If it gets past 30 days , email a follow up , with 7 days final notice to issue the SAR reply , or you will complain to the ICO about the breach of the GDPR law

The ICO will expect you to chase it up first !!

A SAR and reply is not part of this claim process , it's about obtaining documents and pictures etc for later on

Coupon-mad

Almost no one gets a SAR back before defence time and no one cares.  Defence stage is easy.

superdrpanda

Hi all, 

i have typed up my defence. please kindly comment. 

so I have gone through my old hard drive - found some photos i took at the time. I have also located the appeal emails which I have sent to Excel ( obviously they have all been ignored) . essentially - if they are claiming against the US date - then I am not in the country, but if they changed and issue a new claim - then I have proof that I have appealed that PCNs- but no reply and I even resent that email again. 

Many thanks. 

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

3.     The Defendant can confirm with certainty that she was not driving that day (12/03/2016) as she was on holiday overseas. The Claimant is put to strict proof.

4. .In the alternative, if the Claimant applies to formally amend their particulars to show a different date, then the Defendant is aware of the following incident. The defendant denies the claims by the Claimant based on absence of any sort of signs by the disable parking bays where the car was parked and the defendant is a blue badge holder. The signage at the entrance to the car park is especially unclear as it is situated on the left hand side at an angle and can not be seen from the inside of a vehicle.  There were no signs in front or surrounding the disable bays and there was lack of clarity and prominence of terms and conditions and Illegible text due to font size, density, colour and complexity. Therefore the defendant denies entering a legal contract on this basis.

 

Redx

I would alter 3 , based on another thread on here that has had extensive advice by Johnersh, so maybe something like this ?

3.     The Defendant can confirm with certainty that she was not the driver on that day (12 March 2016) as she was on holiday overseas. The Claimant is put to strict proof.

Coupon-mad

Yes, have a look at the other thread and remove #4.  The other thread says why and you can find it by clicking on @Johnersh's username and reading his recent replies.  If you are saying the PCN date was actually on 3rd December (are you sure this is the same PCN as the one they are now claiming for, and it wasn't just that someone else was driving your car in March when you were on holiday, and you have two PCNs?) then your case is the same as the other one Johnersh has replied on this week.

Redx

Here , read all of this

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6292193/bw-legal-county-court-claim/p1

superdrpanda

Coupon-mad said:

Yes, have a look at the other thread and remove #4.  The other thread says why and you can find it by clicking on @Johnersh's username and reading his recent replies.  If you are saying the PCN date was actually on 3rd December (are you sure this is the same PCN as the one they are now claiming for, and it wasn't just that someone else was driving your car in March when you were on holiday, and you have two PCNs?) then your case is the same as the other one Johnersh has replied on this week.

so I am 100% sure there is only 1 PCN - and it is suppose to be on 3rd december. Reason i was in the area as the flat completed on that day -and we went there to collect the keys. it was also my daughter's birthday. 

superdrpanda

Coupon-mad said:

Yes, have a look at the other thread and remove #4.  The other thread says why and you can find it by clicking on @Johnersh's username and reading his recent replies.  If you are saying the PCN date was actually on 3rd December (are you sure this is the same PCN as the one they are now claiming for, and it wasn't just that someone else was driving your car in March when you were on holiday, and you have two PCNs?) then your case is the same as the other one Johnersh has replied on this week.

I have read the thread you were referring to. And base on what I have read (by @Johnersh) - I should delete point 4 as it is not my duty to point out the error and I can only response to what is in the particulars of claim ie 12th march 2016. 

is there anything else i should add to my defence at this point?

quote " Understand that this is litigation, which involves a balancing of risks. There are no guarantees. In general terms:

* I suspect they'll realise the error once a defence is filed, long before the court door. Indeed, this is an open forum, they may already know. 

* They would then have the option to amend or to issue a fresh claim. If it were me, I would resist any efforts to "style it out"  -  I'd make them apply: but you must decide. The claimant could file a reply to your defence, but arguably that would be an abuse if it essentially tried to reframe the whole case. 

* If a claimant is permitted to amend, then a defendant should be given permission to serve a new defence. The error is theirs and the usual order is that the party requesting the amendment pays costs. 

* it cannot be unreasonable to file a defence pertaining to the case as it is put in formal proceedings. It cannot be otherwise. 

* There is no obligation in law to point out error. That's CA authority in Woodward, as I'm sure you know from google  
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2019/985.html
(Para 15 (172) refers.) ' 

Coupon-mad

There is more to delete, in your case, which you will see when you read through the defence and look at that other thread again tonight/tomorrow. You are not best served if you just copy the template verbatim, for obvious reasons.

superdrpanda

Coupon-mad said:

There is more to delete, in your case, which you will see when you read through the defence and look at that other thread again tonight/tomorrow. You are not best served if you just copy the template verbatim, for obvious reasons.

yes of cos. 

In the template  - it mention If you are only the registered keeper and were not driving, you will be saying when you first heard about this parking charge (by post, months later?) and maybe how harassed you felt by the bombardment of ‘debt recovery’ letters, and you might be taking the point that the Defendant cannot be held liable due to the Claimant not complying with the ‘keeper liability’ requirements set out in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4.  

however base on the wrong date in the particulars - should I even bother commenting from the above? feels contradicting if i do.