Advice for CCJ - Not in country when served

Le_Kirk

If using the CEL v Chan, known on here as the @hharry100 defence, you edit paragraph #4 to say if you are RK and driver or RK only and not driver.  In paragraph #5 you give a brief summary of why the car was there but paying attention to the instructions not to answer to details that are not stated in the PARTICULARS OF CLAIM.  Take nothing away, add nothing.  If you wish to show us your defence please JUST paragraph #4 & #5; we don't need to check the whole of the template.

NotAnotherOne

Le_Kirk said:

If using the CEL v Chan, known on here as the @hharry100 defence, you edit paragraph #4 to say if you are RK and driver or RK only and not driver.  In paragraph #5 you give a brief summary of why the car was there but paying attention to the instructions not to answer to details that are not stated in the PARTICULARS OF CLAIM.  Take nothing away, add nothing.  If you wish to show us your defence please JUST paragraph #4 & #5; we don't need to check the whole of the template.

Thanks for this, really appreciate it. 

I will be back to working on my defence this evening so I will share the relevant paragraphs once prepared. 

NotAnotherOne

4.  The facts in this defence come from the Defendant's own knowledge and honest belief.  Conversely, the Claimant sets out a cut-and-paste incoherent and sparse statement of case. The POC appear to be in breach of CPR 16.4, 16PD3 and 16PD7, and fail to "state all facts necessary for the purpose of formulating a complete cause of action". The Defendant is unable, on the basis of the POC, to understand with certainty what case, allegation(s) and what heads of cost are being pursued, making it difficult to respond. However, the vehicle is recognised and it is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver. 

5. The defendant routinely parked their car to attend their place of work in a parking space on Kendall Avenue, W3 0XA. The Defendant had not noticed any signage close to the where the Defendant parked his vehicle, showing the terms and conditions for use, the Defendant was not aware of any restrictions that applied on Kendall Avenue, W3 0XA due to obscure signage which was impossible to read from where the defendant had parked. Due to the age of the alleged breach of contract which is over 7 years old the Defendant is unable to recall the exact reason for the PCN.

This is my paragraph 4 & 5 

Tried to keep 5 as simple as possible whilst also keeping it factual.

Facts are the signage at the time was extremely obscure which I have observed from looking at a google maps street view from 2017. Comparatively to a google maps street view from more recent years where the area is now littered in sign postage from UKPC. 

That in itself tells you the sign postage was extremely poor when I parked there back in 2017.

I don't know if I should add more or take away some but would appreciate any comments. 

Coupon-mad

You could add a quote from the BPA CoP version from at/before the year of the parking event (all versions are linked on the BPA website and can be Googled easily).  A quote about the need for extra signs when new restrictions are introduced.  I assume that it was new, given you habitually parked there. 

NotAnotherOne

I have found the below quote from the BPA 

'Where there is a change in the terms and conditions that materially affects the motorist then you must make these terms and conditions clear on your signage. Where such changes impose liability where none previously existed then you must consider a transition to allow regular visitors to the site to adjust and familiarise themselves with the changes. Best practice would be the installation of additional/ temporary signage at the entrance and throughout the site making it clear that new terms and conditions apply. This will ensure such that regular visitors who may be familiar with the previous terms become aware of the new one' 

I had probably worked in that area for a month at the time I received the PCN. So I'm not sure what changes happened prior. 

I looked on google street view and have seen the changes they made after I received my PCN, so I'm not sure if this would relate. 

Coupon-mad

Put it in anyway.

NotAnotherOne

Hey all, 

I am finalising my defence PDF to send tomorrow morning as that is my deadline. 

I have now included the CEL v Chan including the 4 page transcript (thanks @Le_Kirk for bringing this to my attention) 

Everything else in the defence is from the defence template, aside from the paragraphs which I have amended below 

This includes a paragraph (6) with a quote from the BPA CoP (as suggested by (@Coupon-mad)  about the need for extra signs when new restrictions are introduced. 

If anyone could give this a quick check through this evening that would be greatly appreciated. 

Providing these paragraphs are all good I will get the defence sent over first thing tomorrow morning. 

4.  The facts in this defence come from the Defendant's own knowledge and honest belief.  Conversely, the Claimant sets out a cut-and-paste incoherent and sparse statement of case. The POC appear to be in breach of CPR 16.4, 16PD3 and 16PD7, and fail to "state all facts necessary for the purpose of formulating a complete cause of action". The Defendant is unable, on the basis of the POC, to understand with certainty what case, allegation(s) and what heads of cost are being pursued, making it difficult to respond. However, the vehicle is recognised and it is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver. 

 

5. The defendant routinely parked their car to attend their place of work in a parking space on Kendall Avenue, W3 0XA. The Defendant had not noticed any signage close to the where the Defendant parked his vehicle, showing the terms and conditions for use, the Defendant was not aware of any restrictions that applied on Kendall Avenue, W3 0XA due to obscure signage which was impossible to read from where the defendant had parked. Due to the age of the alleged breach of contract which is over 7 years old the Defendant is unable to recall the exact reason for the PCN.

 

6. The defendant would also like to bring to the attention a paragraph from the BPA CoP which states 'Where there is a change in the terms and conditions that materially affects the motorist then you must make these terms and conditions clear on your signage. Where such changes impose liability where none previously existed then you must consider a transition to allow regular visitors to the site to adjust and familiarise themselves with the changes. Best practice would be the installation of additional/ temporary signage at the entrance and throughout the site making it clear that new terms and conditions apply. This will ensure such that regular visitors who may be familiar with the previous terms become aware of the new one' 

Coupon-mad

Looks OK to me. 

NotAnotherOne

Hey here, 

Just want to double check on this, I have sent my defence over this morning following the instructions on this forum. 

Regarding the acknowledgment I have received an automated reply that says

'Thank you for emailing the Claim Responses Team in the Civil National Business Centre. Please expect a response to your enquiry in 10 days'

I don't want to assume that is considered the acknowledgement, I'm expecting an acknowledgement from a member of staff is that correct?  

Coupon-mad

No of course you don't get acknowledgement from a staff member. They handle millions of claims per year. Automated system.