Gladstones taking me to court for UK CPM

Yettym

Please guys, I have read the Cause of action estoppel but I don’t know how to go about it.
Do I have to wait for PCM to respond to the SARS before I proceed with cause of action estoppel? Because I don’t really no how many ticket I was issued in total. Thank you 

1505grandad

Can you clarify which parking company you think you are dealing with because the title and your posts state

PCM which would suggest the following company:-

Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd

but the operator on the sign posted earlier - and with whom the parking contract is with and therefore presumably the Claimant - is:-

UK Car Park Management Ltd 

As you can see they are two entirely different entities  - please clarify to prevent confusion.

Yettym

1505grandad said:

Can you clarify which parking company you think you are dealing with because the title and your posts state

PCM which would suggest the following company:-

Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd

but the operator on the sign posted earlier - and with whom the parking contract is with and therefore presumably the Claimant - is:-

UK Car Park Management Ltd 

As you can see they are two entirely different entities  - please clarify to prevent confusion.

Yes it’s UK CAR PARK MANAGEMENT sorry for the confusion 

Yettym

Here is the new defence, as I said in the defence I am not the driver ( I don’t have a full driver license) but registered Keeper. Is there any more things you guys think I can add to the defence?  Thank you 

IN THE COUNTY COURT

Claim No.: XXXXXXXX

Between

UK CAR PARK MANAGEMENT LIMITED 

(Claimant) 

- and -  

         YXXXX                         

 (Defendant)

____________________

DEFENCE

____________________

1.       The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.  It is denied that a contract was entered into - by conduct or otherwise - whereby it was ‘agreed’ to pay a ‘parking charge’ and it is denied that this Claimant (understood to have a bare licence as managers) has standing to sue, nor to form contracts in their own name at the location.

The facts as known to the Defendant:

2.    It is admitted that the Defendant was the authorised registered keeper of the vehicle in question at the time of the alleged incident therefore liability is denied.

3.    The identity of the driver of the vehicle on the date in question has not been ascertained.
a) The Claimant did not identify the driver
b) The Defendant has no liability, as they are the Keeper of the vehicle and the Claimant must rely upon the strict provisions of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 in order to hold the defendant responsible for the driver’s alleged breach.
c) The Claimant's increasingly demanding letters failed to evidence any contravention or clear/prominent signage. Further, the Notice to Keeper (postal 'PCN') failed to give the statutory warning to the registered keeper about the '28 day period' which is mandatory wording as prescribed in paragraph 9(2)(f) of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Consequently, the Claimant is unable to rely on the 'keeper liability' provisions of the POFA.

d) The defendant deny accepting any contract from PCM. There is no section on the defendant tenancy contract  that stated that the defendant needs a parking permit to park in the car park.

KeithP

Suggest you replace the word therefore with but in paragraph 2.

Coupon-mad

If you only have one claim then cause of action estoppel wasn't something you needed to read about.

Redx

If you were not driving , then say so in 2 , by editing it yet again

incident but not the driver therefore .........

And edit your thread title to UK CPM , not PCM

And d needs editing too , from PCM , you told us above that it's actually UK CPM !!

Get your sets of initials correct , in the correct order !!  UK CPM 

Or better still , change D to , the claimant , removing the initials completely

Yettym

Coupon-mad said:

If you only have one claim then cause of action estoppel wasn't something you needed to read about.

I know, but I have multiple tickets and I am worried they might come after me for another ticket claim at the end of this one.

Yettym

Redx said:

If you were not driving , then say so in 2 , by editing it yet again

incident but not the driver therefore .........

And edit your thread title to UK CPM , not PCM

And d needs editing too , from PCM , you told us above that it's actually UK CPM !!

Get your sets of initials correct , in the correct order !!  UK CPM 

Or better still , change D to , the claimant , removing the initials completely

Noted thank you 

Redx

Yettym said:

Coupon-mad said:

If you only have one claim then cause of action estoppel wasn't something you needed to read about.

I know, but I have multiple tickets and I am worried they might come after me for another ticket claim at the end of this one.

if they did that, instead of lumping them into this live claim, you would defend and add cause of action estoppel into the mix, because it is a factor in stopping serial claims where the claimant should do ONE claim for all unpaid invoices , not consecutive or concurrent court claims