Excel Parking Services LTD Claim (Previously titled DCBL - Notice of Debt Recovery)

LenaWoods

Had to delete some of the quotes as the word limit was too long

Coupon-mad

Has it got the headings at the top and Statement of Truth at the bottom?

Change this:

"5.5 In the case of Civil Enforcement vs Mik Tak Chan, in August 2023 (Exhibit ....) the court struck out the claim due to the Claimant not meeting the above requirements in section 5 of the WS."

.. to the usual words about the Chan case and CPMS v Akande (both cases) and add both transcripts as exhibits.

Are Elms Legal still involved or have you got to cc in Excel's litigation 'team'? 

LenaWoods

Thanks for the feedback. Elms Legal are still involved yes. 

How do I find the usual words and the transcripts? Sorry, I find this site quite hard to navigate

Coupon-mad

You search the forum, read about ten recent results, find a good one and copy...!

Le_Kirk

b) “To pay Car parking requirements a computer science degree.

Surely you meant: -

b) “To pay Car parking requirements requires a computer science degree.

LenaWoods

I'm just copying and pasting from Google reviews, they probably did mean that

LenaWoods

Hi again - bit of an update....

After receiving the Claimant's Reply to My Defence [RD] (very last min) they did not provide a land owner agreement, failed to evidence the full contract/ terms conditions, and the POC did not match up with their in-text "contract" written in their RD. In fact, the sign they provided as evidence of the contract is not the same sign in the pictures they provided of the vehicle.... 

Since mentioning this all in the WS I got a missed call from Elms Legal asking to "non-judgmentally settle outside of court". Is this normal, is the advice to ignore? Many thanks 

Castle

LenaWoods said:

Hi again - bit of an update....

After receiving the Claimant's Reply to My Defence [RD] (very last min) they did not provide a land owner agreement, failed to evidence the full contract/ terms conditions, and the POC did not match up with their in-text "contract" written in their RD. In fact, the sign they provided as evidence of the contract is not the same sign in the pictures they provided of the vehicle.... 

Since mentioning this all in the WS I got a missed call from Elms Legal asking to "non-judgmentally settle outside of court". Is this normal, is the advice to ignore? Many thanks 

Do you mean that or is it a witness statement?

LenaWoods

Sorry yes their WS

ChirpyChicken

LenaWoods said:

Hi again - bit of an update....

After receiving the Claimant's Reply to My Defence [RD] (very last min) they did not provide a land owner agreement, failed to evidence the full contract/ terms conditions, and the POC did not match up with their in-text "contract" written in their RD. In fact, the sign they provided as evidence of the contract is not the same sign in the pictures they provided of the vehicle.... 

Since mentioning this all in the WS I got a missed call from Elms Legal asking to "non-judgmentally settle outside of court". Is this normal, is the advice to ignore? Many thanks 

yes just ignore