Napier Court Claim Form

agent17

Redx said:

I believe that she means the template defence , !ocated in the DEFENCE template post at the top of the forum in announcements , replacing paragraphs 2 and 3 with your own numbered paragraphs , ( because you have a court claim form from the CCBC in Northampton )

You will be emailing the defence as a pdf document , you DO NOT fill in the online thingy

Thanks, to be clear, I edit points 2 & 3 to suit but I leave, and do not touch, all the other points 4 - 18 in it?

Also, may I ask if you think this is ok? Too much or a good defence?

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.

The vehicle in question was used for shop business and may have been parked by myself or a member of staff so it is not clear who the driver was at the time. Regardless, it should be noted that the vehicle was parked in the space allocated to my shop by the Landlord as per my lease which never required the use of any permits nor is chargeable. 

3. Under the terms of my commercial lease, dated February 2017, I am entitled to park a vehicle in the space directly behind my shop. Actually, I am entitled to park two vehicles as I leased two adjacent shops from the landlord, each entitled to one parking space. 

This agreement precedes Napier’s involvement with managing the site. In fact, there was no managed/enforced car parking when I signed my lease, just allocated parking for residents i.e. myself and others trading from the shops. Nor were there any parking restrictions in place, apart from a padlock to the entrance of the site, which I was given keys to as part of the parking rights for my shops. I would not have taken these shops if I knew there would be issues with parking at a later date, but that is a moot point.

Napier bulldozed the separate strip of land behind the shop/residents parking area and created a brand new car park around April/May 2017, some 2-3 months after my lease started, followed by marking out parking bays behind all the shops in the original residents area and, if memory serves me correct, issued the first permits to shopkeepers around June 2017.

We religiously displayed permits in any car that was parked in this area, despite not being required to under the terms of the lease, simply to make for a peaceful life, and avoid the uncomfortable predatory behaviour of the wardens who regularly moved along the cars parked by the shopkeepers in their own spaces, peering through front and back windows, hoping to slap a ticket on anyone who forgot to display their permit. It should be noted that the wardens were well aware who the legitimate shopkeepers were but were clearly instructed to hound us at every opportunity in the hope of catching us without one.

That being said, because different vehicles were used at different times, we kept the permits in the front office at all times so, after parking, whoever was driving would need to enter the rear of the locked building, disable alarms, make their way to the front office and then return with the permit to place it on the windscreen. So, if a permit was not on display, it was merely an issue of not having chance to get it and return to the vehicle to display it. This may be irrelevant due to the legitimate right to park, as stated in the lease, but it would still be a relevant factor under normal circumstances where there was no pre-existing right to park. 

agent17

Coupon-mad said:

The template defence thread already tells you all of this.

Sorry, I do see a lot has been written and I have tried reading a few times but it is heavy going and a little daunting at first with, it appears, quite a few variables. I just don't want to make a mistake and I'm sure once I've completed one, all will become clearer and I won't need to ask any questions next time...  

Umkomaas

There's no 'me, myself or I' (first person) in a Defence, always 'the Defendant' (third person). By the same token 'the Claimant' should too be written in the third person, not by their name. Your draft above needs to be adjusted.

Le_Kirk

......... and every paragraph requires a number.

Redx

agent17 said:

Coupon-mad said:

The template defence thread already tells you all of this.

Sorry, I do see a lot has been written and I have tried reading a few times but it is heavy going and a little daunting at first with, it appears, quite a few variables. I just don't want to make a mistake and I'm sure once I've completed one, all will become clearer and I won't need to ask any questions next time...  

Ideally there should not be a next time , because you should learn from this and avoid private PCNs , plus do plan A if one did arrive.  A court claim results after missed opportunities in most cases , or multiple mistakes by the victim defendant , like not updating their V5C , not complaining , not appealing , etc

So no next time , hopefully !! ( I have never had a private PCN or a private PCN court claim either )

Make the changes suggested above , then post your newly adjusted numbered paragraphs below , for critique

Do not post the unaltered paragraphs , it's your homework being checked not coupon mads 😁😁👍👍

Coupon-mad

Apart from that, it sounds like a strong defence.  Well written points including lack of a grace period to even fetch the permit that you had no relevant obligation to display!

agent17

Redx said:

agent17 said:

Coupon-mad said:

The template defence thread already tells you all of this.

Sorry, I do see a lot has been written and I have tried reading a few times but it is heavy going and a little daunting at first with, it appears, quite a few variables. I just don't want to make a mistake and I'm sure once I've completed one, all will become clearer and I won't need to ask any questions next time...  

Ideally there should not be a next time , because you should learn from this and avoid private PCNs , plus do plan A if one did arrive.  A court claim results after missed opportunities in most cases , or multiple mistakes by the victim defendant , like not updating their V5C , not complaining , not appealing , etc

So no next time , hopefully !! ( I have never had a private PCN or a private PCN court claim either )

Make the changes suggested above , then post your newly adjusted numbered paragraphs below , for critique

Do not post the unaltered paragraphs , it's your homework being checked not coupon mads 😁😁👍👍

I will make the changes shortly, but when i send it do I still include paragraphs 4-18 that are in the original defence template? I think I do, but just checking...

agent17

Umkomaas said:

There's no 'me, myself or I' (first person) in a Defence, always 'the Defendant' (third person). By the same token 'the Claimant' should too be written in the third person, not by their name. Your draft above needs to be adjusted.

Thanks for that, and @Le_Kirk for the numbers advice.

You think this is ok?

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 vehicle in question was used for shop business and may have been parked by the defendant or a member of the defendant’s staff so it is not clear who the driver was at the time. Regardless, it should be noted that the vehicle was parked in the space allocated to the defendants shop by the Landlord as per the defendants lease which never required the use of any permits nor is chargeable. 

4. Under the terms of the defendants commercial lease, dated February 2017, the defendant is entitled to park a vehicle in the space directly behind my shop. Actually, the defendant is entitled to park two vehicles as the defendant leased two adjacent shops from the landlord, each entitled to one parking space. 

5. This agreement precedes the claimants involvement with managing the site. In fact, there was no managed/enforced car parking when the defendant signed the lease, just allocated parking for residents i.e. the defendant and others trading from the shops. Nor were there any parking restrictions in place, apart from a padlock to the entrance of the site, which the defendant was given keys to as part of the parking rights for the defendant shops. The defendant would not have taken these shops if it were known there would be issues with parking at a later date, but that is a moot point.

6. The claimant bulldozed the separate strip of land behind the shop/residents parking area and created a brand new car park around April/May 2017, some 2-3 months after the defendants lease started, followed by marking out parking bays behind all the shops in the original residents area and, if memory serves correct, issued the first permits to shopkeepers around June 2017.

7. The defendant and defendants staff religiously displayed permits in any car that was parked in this area, despite not being required to under the terms of the lease, but simply to make for a peaceful life and avoid the uncomfortable predatory behaviour of the wardens who regularly moved along the cars parked by the shopkeepers in their own spaces, peering through front and back windows, hoping to slap a ticket on anyone who forgot to display their permit. Delivery drivers were also hounded by this unscrupulous operator. It should be noted that the wardens were well aware who the legitimate shopkeepers were but were clearly instructed to hound them at every opportunity in the hope of issuing a ticket.

8. That being said, because different vehicles were used at different times, the defendant kept the permits in the front office so, after parking, whoever was driving would need to enter the rear of the locked building, disable alarms, make their way to the front office and then return with the permit to place it on the windscreen. So, if a permit was not on display, it was merely an issue of not having chance to get it and return to the vehicle to display it. This may be irrelevant due to the legitimate right to park, as stated in the lease, but it would still be a relevant factor under normal circumstances where there was no pre-existing right to park.

Points 9 and onward would be the original and unedited defence template points 4-18, am I right?

Le_Kirk

Yes, add back in the rest of the template before you submit it but do watch out for this (usually posted by @1505grandad): -

Hopefully you have read and understood the Template Defence and therefore realise that the existing para 7  in the Template states -  "He was not taken by either party to Somerfield in point #5 above and in any event it is worth noting that the lead Southampton case of Britannia v Crosby was not appealed."

As you now have more than paras 2 and 3 - and therefore have to renumber the subsequent paras - you have altered the reference to point 5 accordingly.

agent17

Me again folks...   

Right, I've emailed my defence and downloaded the DQ.
 
I'm following instructions on how to complete but just a couple of small (probably stupid  ) questions:

1) The very first box "To be completed by or on behalf of" - Do I put my name or just Defendant?

2) Top right "In The" - Do I put the local county court that I have written in section D?

3) And this last one really is obvious (I think) but just to make sure I'm not misunderstanding anything here - Claim number is the court claim number on paperwork I received?

Thanks everyone for all your help so far 👍

p.s. It says send to court and claimant. I read I can email it to claimant but do I just post this to my local court (or can I email it?) with nothing else and just wait?