LBCC - County Court Claim - Enterprise Parking Solutions

Coupon-mad

The crib sheet is to help you focus so it should be bullet points that you are happy with. How long is up to you.  What can you handle to skim read under pressure? If that is going to help you focus, like in a job interview, then we won't criticise it.

Can I check you filed and served your WS in time?  The thread is long and I didn't see it on this end page.

happych4ppy

Coupon-mad said:

The crib sheet is to help you focus so it should be bullet points that you are happy with. How long is up to you.  What can you handle to skim read under pressure? If that is going to help you focus, like in a job interview, then we won't criticise it.

Can I check you filed and served your WS in time?  The thread is long and I didn't see it on this end page.

Thanks and yeah I filled my WS on time, they on the other hand did not so I put a note to raise that as a preliminary matter. I did post my WS earlier in the thread but would it help if I posted it here again?

How does it go down in court? Will the judge go through each parties WS and work through each point? I'm trying to understand how I will use the crib sheet once i'm on there...

Another question I have relates to mentioning things I've learned since submitting my evidence that are not on my WS, can I bring these up in court? For example the Land owner "contract service agreement" fails companies Act 43 and 44, it's not signed property etc. - but this isn't explained in my WS, my WS only states how they "lack landowner authority evidence" but it doesn't explain specifically why. Can I bring the Companies Act bit in court if it's no in my WS?

Cheers

Coupon-mad

I wouldn't talk about the Companies Act.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/79212417#Comment_79212417

happych4ppy

Coupon-mad said:

I wouldn't talk about the Companies Act.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/79212417#Comment_79212417

Thanks, how would I go about explaining that the "Contract Service Agreement" is invalid due to not having correct signatures etc, without mentioning the Companies Act?

Coupon-mad

I wouldn't try that argument in court but that's just my opinion.  Nail down your arguments to your good ones.

happych4ppy

@Fruitcake sorry to tag you twice, what do you think about me mentioning these points during the hearing? and can I mention them if they are not explicitly explained in my WS?

18) Contract Service Agreement:  different documents from different sites, first page is page 1 of 8, second page is page 3 of 14 … (claimant is put to strict proof that the contrary is true)	Claimant WS) “Contract Service Agreement”
19) Contract Service Agreement: second page no signed or dated by the client therefor failed to comply with the strict requirements of Sections 44 of the Companies Act 2006	Claimant WS) “Contract Service Agreement” Companies Act 2006) 44 Execution of documents …not signed by two people from each company nor by a director and witness of each company in accordance with the requirements
20) Signature of the person signing for the landowner has been redacted, so there is no proof that it was signed by Richard Williams, or that the signatory has authority to sign a contract on behalf of the landowner (if they had there would be no reason to redact it) and therefore failed to comply with the strict requirements of Sections 43 and 44 of the Companies Act 2006,	Claimant WS) “Contract Service Agreement” Defendant WS paragraph 28) Lack of landowner authority evidence  Hancock v Promontoria (Chestnut) Limited [2020] EWCA Civ 907 > court of appeal are now clear that redactions are improper where the court are being asked to interpret the contract Companies Act 2006) 43 Company contracts (Richard Williams is not an officer of the company nor someone with express or implied authority) Companies Act 2006) 44 Execution of documents …not signed by two people from each company nor by a director and witness of each company in accordance with the requirements …Richard Williams is not (authorised to sign the contract) an officer of the company or someone with controlling interest, ref judgement case number F1DP92KF “Claire Williams could not have signed the contract on behalf of the owner because she is not a director or the owner”

 

Fruitcake

You can comment on anything at the hearing that you have provided to the court, or the claimant has provided to you.

I would include it all if it were me, but other opinions are available.

Umkomaas

Is your crib sheet in order of your strongest points?  I don't think there is any way you will get to the bottom of your list, so prioritise it.  In many case each party gets only around a few minutes to speak, sometimes no opportunity at all (particularly if the Judge finds for the motorist) and it's all over and done with in 15 minutes. 

You won't be getting as much time as the Wagathas!

happych4ppy

Based on previous cases what would be the strongest points in order? Would they be something like?

*) preliminary matter > they didn't file their WS on time

1) photos of signs purported as evidence are on a different date (cannot be considered as evidence)

2) no evidence of sign visibility from cars entering/parking/existing or entering the venue for which the car park serviced

3) BPA regulation failures, 1) terms+conditions not (on entrance sign) "visible from the start", 2) nor "conspicuous" nor "legible"

4) unclear/misleading/hidden/vague terms+conditions, mix of large/small font, incapable of binding (CRA 2015), no contract seen/known/agreed

*) vs. beavis signs (large signs, penalty in largest font + high contrast black/yellow on entrance sign and signs throughout) 

5) unexpected/unfair obligation to register VRM ("free for customers" + no evidence of clear/prominent notices to register VRM)

*) CRA 2015 requirement for 'prominence', contract terms + 'consumer notices'/signage/notices/communications, must be fair. 

6) no evidence of prominent registration machine/ipad on the day (out of sight) > burden to register VRM is on the Claimant

7) no evidence of VMR was not registered on the day + no evidence the machine was working on that day

8) no landowner contract: document not whole, redacted signatures, signatory has no authority, fails Companies Act 43,44 (not signed by two people from each company nor by a director and witness of each company in accordance with the requirements)

9) lack of fair/alternative/independent dispute resolution service > fair process was not followed before litigation ('DLUHC' private parking code of practice)

10) claiming unexpected costs on indemnity basis is unfair (Unfair Contract Terms Guidance, CMA37, para 5.14.3 > CRA 2015

11) adding banned costs they have not incurred > double recovery ('DLUHC' private parking code of practice)

12) Excel vs Wilkinson (double recovery constitutes abuse of process > struck out)

13) sum claimed exceeds maximum potentially recoverable from a registered keeper (POFA, Schedule 4 paragraph 4(5))

Umkomaas

Signage (the contract) should always figure near the top (I presume you have good evidence to back up your argument). 

Landowner contract, but you'll need to know your way around the case law to convincingly argue the Companies Act failure re 'redacted signatures' point. Don't assume a Judge will know.

DLUHC point, backed up with Excel v Wilkinson.