VCS County Court Claim - Hearing Stage: I Won!!!

Not_A_Hope

That WS is very comprehensive and should see them crawl back under their stone. A few comments:-

Typos para 4 - resourced perhaps be resorted? Para 10. Should resident be residents?

Paras 52, 55, 56 and 61 all deal with the add on fake costs. As the new COP is not yet in place these are not yet banned. You should amend each para to indicate they are intended to be banned

Coupon-mad

The template defence has been amended last week to reflect the current position, so you can just copy the new wording for your WS.

B789

Just two points to note, one of which is only relevant to the redacted version.

You have 2 paragraphs #45.

In paragraph #46 you have left the LLC name unredacted which kind of defeats the purpose of all the other multiple redactions of that name.

Very thorough and well researched WS though.

koahanee

@Not_A_Hope @Coupon-mad @B789 Thank you for all advice and constructive feedback 👍🏻 Really appreciate it 🙏 Sorry about the delay in response - Had a long day at work today.

Have taken my WS off due to the redacted error. Will make the updates as above and redact paragraph 46 and re-upload V2 👍🏻

Thank you all again for your help 🙏 

koahanee

Hi all,

Thank you for all your advice so far. I have now updated the WS; please see version 2 below.
The exhibits including my lease etc are not included in this version only as these documents are in PDF forms and I couldn't redact them for sharing purpose.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1HL6Ww5NEK-w97Iyj7Uj94lpxtXACTtb5/view?usp=sharing

Look forward to any further feedback

Thank you all again for your help :-) 

Coupon-mad

That's very good but I couldn't tell if you have Excel v Wilkinson as an Exhibit, as you should?

And I'd remove 35 and 36 (completely) because ParkingEye v Somerfield pre-dates Beavis and no Judge will go against Beavis which holds that a parking firm can form contracts with drivers. Also Somerfield isn't usually used to argue about no landowner authority; instead the High Court judgment is used to argue a different point: that the added costs are a penalty (because the High Court says exactly that in Somerfield, and the CoA did not disagree with any findings and upheld the high court's judgment). 

koahanee

Thank you @Coupon-mad 🙏 I haven’t got Excel v Wilkinson as an exhibit but will add now.

and will take out paragraphs 35 and 36 too 👍🏻 Thank you so much for your help 

Coupon-mad

koahanee said:

Thank you @Coupon-mad 🙏 I haven’t got Excel v Wilkinson as an exhibit but will add now.

As seen in the WS bundle by @aphex007 which is an exemplar version.

koahanee

Hi @Coupon-mad @KeithP @Le_Kirk

Just got a quick procedural question. I’m thinking of filing my WS bundle via email - the letter from the County Court (below) mentioned I could do so if I wish to. Would it be advisable to file my WS via email? Or is hard copy preferred?

Also the letter mentioned to follow Practice Direction 5B when filing electronic document. Is there anything in particular I need to do for this?

Many thanks 🙏

Le_Kirk

We advise e-mail (don't forget copy to claimant) subject to any restriction on size of file/number of pages by the court.