Claim form received from County Court

Khas

Thank you Coupon-mad and Redx for your continued support and valuable feedback relating to preparing my Defence.I really appreciate your help.

I completely agree with you that kids should be walking to school which I always do but that day was an exception due to my asthma attack.

When I originally received the PCN from UKCPM I appealed it via email to them explaining my reason to park in Cunningham Close in which I mentioned about me not feeling well due to asthma and to drop off the kids to school and I mentioned it in my first post https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6108752/trace-debt-recovery-letter-received-need-help-please#latest so can I now change my statement and mention something different in my Defence please.

There is a grocery shop near to where I parked my car, can I mention that it was a short visit to local grocery shop?

 

I don’t want to lose the case and would request your invaluable advice please.

Le_Kirk

A defence should be accurate, honest and truthful.  Just think what you would say to the judge if he/she asked you a direct question!   Just because you didn't put it in your appeal doesn't mean it didn't happen; you might have decided to leave it out as being irrelevant.

Khas

Thanks for your message Le_Kirk. It’s just I can’t think of how to present my reason to park in my Defence so it’s considered valid in front of the court.

Redx

Khas said:

Thanks for your message Le_Kirk. It’s just I can’t think of how to present my reason to park in my Defence so it’s considered valid in front of the court.

Neither can we , lol. 😁😁😋😋

It's 2 paragraphs out of almost 20 that you are being asked to write ! Imagine starting from scratch with a blank sheet of paper !

This forum gives opinions , but we cannot give legal advice or try to bend the facts or make stuff up , hence why coupon mad insists that defendants write 2 & 3 and we may offer suggestions or critique based on what we see

Sometimes an elephant is just an elephant , even when dressed up in finery and beads etc

Coupon-mad

I can! 

OK, you need to add in the asthma attack and state that the Claimant knows this was the reason you pulled over there and they knew this mitigation fact xx months ago in your appeal and ignored it.

Khas

Thanks again for your feedbacks guys and Thank you Coupon-mad for the great advice. Much appreciated.
I have re-drafted the Defence if you could kindly have a look and provide your feedback
Once again Thank you for your continued support.

The facts as known to the Defendant:

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

3.            The Defendant was going to drop off his children to school on 16/10/2019 and on the way he suffered a severe attack of asthma so he pulled over his car in Cunningham Close. The Defendant briefly parked his car in Cunningham Close due to his health condition and left site as soon as he felt better. The street had no road markings and the signage was unclear and unreadable.  Due to the scarce and unclear signs it was not at all obvious to the Defendant that the Close was being run as if it was a commercial car park. The signs were not prominent and any contract was incapable of being read.

4.         When the PCN was issued, the Defendant informed the Claimant in an appeal that he parked his car in Cunningham Close due to his health condition (asthma). The Claimant knew this mitigation fact 25 months ago in the Defendant’s appeal and ignored it.

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.

Le_Kirk

That's good.  I might work a little more on the signage and road markings and state that: -

"on a subsequent visit to investigate the area after having received the PCN, the defendant noted that the street had no road markings and the signage, such as it was, was unclear and unreadable.  Due to the scarce and unclear signs it was not at all obvious to the Defendant that the Close was being run as if it was a commercial car park. The signs were not prominent and any contract was incapable of being formed read".

Redx

As mentioned above , it's looking a lot better now and anyone reading it should understand the type of "car park" and background circumstances etc, especially a judge

No Landowner authority , poor and inadequate signage , plus the medical issues etc may well work in your favour !

Khas

Thank you again for all the help guys much appreciated

Khas

Dear All

Thanks for all your support I submitted my Defence before Christmas and received acknowledgment through post last week.

Do I need to do anything now or wait for further correspondence from the Court please.