Gladstone/ AM parking services LTD CLAIM FORM

Le_Kirk

If you know for sure that you were not driving on the day, then you can say so with complete honesty by proving that you were somewhere else (Google time line on your phone, attending classes at Uni, shopping and here's a receipt etc.)  If you cannot remember "who was driving on an unremarkable day X years/months ago", then say that.  What you must not do is deny you were driving if you were; just ask yourself what you would say if the judge asked you that direct question at the hearing!  All paragraphs require a number.

Coupon-mad

I can't disagree with wording I wrote for you!  But every paragraph needs a number.

laurenjo12

sorry for delayed response..night shifts!:(
I will not include the bit about possibly other drivers.
is this correct?

 

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 registered keeper of the vehicle in question but liability is denied.

 

 

 3. The defendant requested a Subject Access Request and the Claimant responded in December 2021 with not a single photograph of any signs, the car, any breach, any terms or even a copy of a supposed PCN.  Nothing at all relating to the parking charge mentioned in the Particulars was supplied, except for some aggressive debt recovery letters.  Nothing by way of evidence.  Hence the Defendant is prejudiced and is none the wiser about the reason for the alleged parking charge and will have to respond at witness statement stage after being ambushed then.

 

4. The Defendant feels this cannot be right and the Claimant is in breach of not only the GDPR rules about a SAR but the Civil Procedure rules and pre-action protocol too.  The Defendant asks the court to use its case management powers to strike out the claim for want of full particulars, or alternatively, to Order the Claimant to provide full and detailed particulars including all the images and all evidence that was withheld from the SAR response, and then time should be allowed for the Defendant to respond to update their defence if they wish, at no expense to the Defendant.

 

5.  The Particulars of Claim set out an incoherent statement of case and the quantum has been enhanced in excess of any sum hidden in small print on the signage that the Claimant may be relying upon.  Claiming ‘costs/damages’ on an indemnity basis is stated to be unfair in the Unfair Contract Terms Guidance, CMA37, para 5.14.3.  That is the official Government guidance on the Consumer Rights Act 2015 ('CRA 2015') legislation which must be considered, given the duty in s71.  The Defendant avers that the CRA 2015 has been breached due to unfair terms and/or unclear notices (signs), pursuant to s62 and with regard to the requirements for transparency and good faith, and paying regard to examples 6, 10, 14 and 18 in Sch2.  NB: this is different from the UTCCRs considered by the Supreme Court, in that there is now a requirement for contract terms and notices to be fair.

Coupon-mad

I will not include the bit about possibly other drivers.

Why?

Either your defence para 2 should say you were 'keeper and driver' or if you are certain you were not, then it must deny being the driver, or if you don't know because you've not been shown any information and it's an unremarkable day years ago, you must state that.

laurenjo12

my parents were both named drivers on the car (mainly as the insurance was cheaper) but it was the car i had at uni so im sure they wouldnt have been using it.
ill make adjustments now

laurenjo12

The facts as known to the Defendant:

 

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

 

 3. The defendant requested a Subject Access Request and the Claimant responded in December 2021 with not a single photograph of any signs, the car, any breach, any terms or even a copy of a supposed PCN.  Nothing at all relating to the parking charge mentioned in the Particulars was supplied, except for some aggressive debt recovery letters.  Nothing by way of evidence.  Hence the Defendant is prejudiced and is none the wiser about the reason for the alleged parking charge and will have to respond at witness statement stage after being ambushed then.

 

4. The Defendant feels this cannot be right and the Claimant is in breach of not only the GDPR rules about a SAR but the Civil Procedure rules and pre-action protocol too.  The Defendant asks the court to use its case management powers to strike out the claim for want of full particulars, or alternatively, to Order the Claimant to provide full and detailed particulars including all the images and all evidence that was withheld from the SAR response, and then time should be allowed for the Defendant to respond to update their defence if they wish, at no expense to the Defendant.

 

 

 

5.  The Particulars of Claim set out an incoherent statement of case and the quantum has been enhanced in excess of any sum hidden in small print on the signage that the Claimant may be relying upon.  Claiming ‘costs/damages’ on an indemnity basis is stated to be unfair in the Unfair Contract Terms Guidance, CMA37, para 5.14.3.  That is the official Government guidance on the Consumer Rights Act 2015 ('CRA 2015') legislation which must be considered, given the duty in s71.  The Defendant avers that the CRA 2015 has been breached due to unfair terms and/or unclear notices (signs), pursuant to s62 and with regard to the requirements for transparency and good faith, and paying regard to examples 6, 10, 14 and 18 in Sch2.  NB: this is different from the UTCCRs considered by the Supreme Court, in that there is now a requirement for contract terms and notices to be fair.

laurenjo12

is this better? and then i just change the paragraph numbers of the ones in the template?

Coupon-mad

Yes that's better.  I would just add a bit more here to cover yourself so you can expand on everything in the WS later, when you know something about the allegations:

2.       It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in question but liability is denied.  Any breach of terms is also denied.  The Claimant is put to strict proof of their allegations and evidence and the Defendant will be in a position to respond only once furnished with same.

laurenjo12

Thankyou so much. I will submit this tomorrow morning. Hopefully then i can relax for a  couple of weeks over christmas before the next phase commences.

Coupon-mad

Make sure you get an acknowledgment email and that the fact you have defended is then logged a few days later on MCOL, then you can relax for a month!