Claim form received, help and opinions needed for defence

Coupon-mad

Nope, unless you are very unreasonable such as defending the case then not doing a witness statement and not turning up for the hearing.

If you lose you'd pay LESS.  If you don't know why, you need to read the rest of the template defence again to get what part is unlikely to be allowed by any Judge these days.

Stanley821

Thanks, I was just wondering if further solicitor fees can be added such as their costs for attending court, like the made up additional debt collection charges I’ve already been billed for

Not_A_Hope

Can any of the regulars remember the details of the recent court case where a PPC took a QC to court for overstaying at a motorway services and he wiped the floor with them. 

Stanley821

This one? Five years ago though…

https://amp.theguardian.com/money/2017/aug/26/parking-eye-takes-on-top-barrister-85-fine

Coupon-mad

Stanley821 said:

Thanks, I was just wondering if further solicitor fees can be added such as their costs for attending court, like the made up additional debt collection charges I’ve already been billed for

Only if you behave unreasonably, as I said.

Stanley821

Here are my parts 2 and 3 to be added to the latest template. I have studied other threads related to moto Cherwell services and I don't think that number 22 applies but please correct me if you think I am mistaken.

The facts as known to the Defendant:

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in question.

3. After embarking on a long, monotonous motorway journey, the defendant arrived late in the evening at the services and did not see the poorly lit sign displaying the parking terms.
 
The defendant parked in an area where there were no signs present and due to not wanting to drive whilst tired had a sleep, then went and bought some refreshments from the services.

On the way back to their car, the defendant noticed a smaller sign which explained parking charges. The only way to pay was by telephone but this sign didn't give the telephone number and directed the defendant towards other signs in the car park to find the number to ring.

The defendant found the correct number and rang it for what seemed like at least ten minutes. Once it got to providing the registration plate details, the defendant made a mistake entering letters on their phone's numeric keypad and had to start all over again.

The defendant had been instructed specifically to pay by mobile phone. There were no Pay & Display machines nor to the defendant’s knowledge any facility to pay inside the premises. Every effort to pay before leaving was thwarted by a cumbersome system and reliance on an unreliable phone signal.  Despite reasonable endeavours, the defendant simply could not enter into the contract, which proved impossible to comply with, given the method required. The authority in Jolley v Carmel applies and attention is also drawn to the new DLUHC Code of Practice which confirms that parking operators should not be using systems that set drivers up to fail with cumbersome and error-risky number plate 'keying' requirements.

Umkomaas

The defendant found the correct number and rang it for what seemed like at least ten minutes. Once it got to providing the registration plate details, the defendant made a mistake entering letters on their phone's numeric keypad and had to start all over again.

You might want to say what happened to 'starting all over again', why did that 'fail' too?

Stanley821

I felt that the payment method was just too difficult to use, especially given the time of day, half one in the morning

Umkomaas

Stanley821 said:

I felt that the payment method was just too difficult to use, especially given the time of day, half one in the morning

I think you need a form of words to explain that, but not suggesting a CBA decision. 

Stanley821

I’ll have a think about it today. Needs to be submitted tomorrow