4 Year Old PCN with bonus PCN

Coupon-mad

This is something your court forced them to do.

Ring up and ask for a copy if the order doesn't arrive this week.  You need to know what YOUR obligations & deadlines now are.
 Which court please? Warwick? Southampton?

DCBLegal won't get any money from you and will discontinue before the hearing, you know that from @Umkomaas' dedicated DCB Legal thread.

snores

Coupon-mad said:

This is something your court forced them to do.

Ring up and ask for a copy if the order doesn't arrive this week.  You need to know what YOUR obligations & deadlines now are.
 Which court please? Warwick? Southampton?

DCBLegal won't get any money from you and will discontinue before the hearing, you know that from @Umkomaas' dedicated DCB Legal thread.

It's Manchester. 
I'll definitely ring back by Thursday and ask for a copy if it doesn't arrive in the post by then. Would they email it to me if I asked? The person on the phone wasn't particularly helpful.
Fingers crossed for a discontinuance! I was hoping it would go straight to that but instead this curveball has appeared. I'll check out the thread, thanks again CP

snores

Hi, the court order still hasn't arrived and I finally got through to the court after attempting numerous times. They said they would have to charge me £11 if they send me the order electronically, so the person on the phone just read it out to me.
He said the original Particulars of Claim was struck out, as was my Defence. DCB had until 6/12/22 to file a new Particulars of Claim, which they've done, and I have until 20/12/22 to file a new Defence, responding to each point in the amended POC.
Can I get some advice on how to write a new Defence please? Can I just use the template that I used originally and address the specific points they've newly highlighted? This time they've said it's "a failure to validate parking on the machines provided" and "the Claimant holds no record of the Vehicle's parking being validated"

Coupon-mad

Yes, use the template defence and change your point 3 onwards (your facts section) to confirm or deny the allegations now made.

Show is only your section, not the template.

snores

The Court Order arrived!

It says "the Defence is struck out because it is excessive in length (appearing to be a template Defence rather than a Defence prepared for the purposes of this claim), fails to deal with the issues relevant to this claim, and does not actually say whether the Defendant admits or denies that she or her driver was in breach of contract".
"The Defendant shall by 20/12/22 file and serve a properly pleaded Defence, limited to 4 pages and identifying briefly whether each allegation in the POC is admitted or denied and the reasons for denying the same. If the Defendant fails to comply, the Defence will be struck out"

Mouse007

snores said:

The Court Order arrived!

It says "the Defence is struck out because it is excessive in length (appearing to be a template Defence rather than a Defence prepared for the purposes of this claim), fails to deal with the issues relevant to this claim, and does not actually say whether the Defendant admits or denies that she or her driver was in breach of contract".
"The Defendant shall by 20/12/22 file and serve a properly pleaded Defence, limited to 4 pages and identifying briefly whether each allegation in the POC is admitted or denied and the reasons for denying the same. If the Defendant fails to comply, the Defence will be struck out"

I think I'll go and get my pop corn and await coupon mads response.

snores

Mouse007 said:

snores said:

The Court Order arrived!

It says "the Defence is struck out because it is excessive in length (appearing to be a template Defence rather than a Defence prepared for the purposes of this claim), fails to deal with the issues relevant to this claim, and does not actually say whether the Defendant admits or denies that she or her driver was in breach of contract".
"The Defendant shall by 20/12/22 file and serve a properly pleaded Defence, limited to 4 pages and identifying briefly whether each allegation in the POC is admitted or denied and the reasons for denying the same. If the Defendant fails to comply, the Defence will be struck out"

I think I'll go and get my pop corn and await coupon mads response.

I feel really insulted actually that they deem it 'excessive in length' - it's all pertinent and wouldn't be included if it was irrelevant. Really unsure how to condense it into 4 pages

snores

snores said:

"does not actually say whether the Defendant admits or denies that she or her driver was in breach of contract".

I bloody did....(right?)

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered hirer of the vehicle but liability is denied. The Defendant confirms that as the hirer of this vehicle, the Defendant is its keeper for the purpose of the corresponding definition under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (“POFA”). The identity of the driver on this date is unknown to the Defendant. The Defendant was not the only user of the vehicle in question and is unable to recall who was or was not driving on an unremarkable date over 5 years ago.

Mouse007

snores said:

I feel really insulted actually that they deem it 'excessive in length' - it's all pertinent and wouldn't be included if it was irrelevant. Really unsure how to condense it into 4 pages

I think it is outrageous but have no idea if the Court has the right to restrict your defence in that way.

Mouse007

25 pages appears to be the limit

https://www.civillitigationbrief.com/2018/03/23/striking-out-a-defence-font-size-line-spacing-and-a-maximum-page-length-ordered-pleadings-that-tend-to-obfuscate-rather-than-clarify-the-issues/