Draft defence for court claim - any feedback?

caro2022

I have recently received a court claim. I have followed all the instructions in the newbies post - requested a SAR, acknowledged service etc. I actually tried to pay this fine ages ago but they returned my cheque! On all the debt collection letters it lists the criteria they need to meet for it to go to court, one of which is that they need to evidence that I don't intend to pay. Seeing as I have a letter from them with the returned cheque, does this mean that i will have a good case in court? I feel that they returned it so they could try to extract a larger amount of money from me. Anyway, here's the draft:

The facts as known to the Defendant:

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question. The defendant denies being the driver of the vehicle at the time of issue of the PCN.

3. 

The driver of the vehicle was using this car park in order to attend an educational health and safety course. The ticket payment machine on site only accepted cash, there being no option to pay by phone or card, despite the fact that cash payments were being discouraged during this period of Covid-19.

The car park was located in a beach/rural area so there was no means of obtaining cash, and no alternative area in which to park.

Fortunately the driver had a small amount of cash (£2.00) on their person, so purchased a ticket to this amount allowing them to park for two hours. However, the course overran and they were unable to return to the car by this time. If there had been other options for payment they would have happily purchased a ticket to cover the cost of parking for a longer period.

4.

The driver planned to change driver details from the Defendant’s name and appeal but missed the deadline due to illness. Therefore a cheque dated 12/11/2021 was sent to the Claimant for full payment of the invoice of £60.00.

However, the cheque was returned by the Claimant in a letter dated 17/11/2021, where they stated that the matter had been passed onto Debt Recovery Plus and they were therefore unable to take the payment.

Debt Recovery Plus then sent a series of harassing letters between 30/11/2021 and 10/02/2022, continuing to add extortionate and disproportionate fees and penalties to the original charge. These extra charges were not explained or justified.

Numerous attempts to contact Debt Recovery Plus by email and telephone were unsuccessful, due to non-acknowledgement of emails, long caller queues and eventually being cut off the line. Similarly, the Claimant was unable to be reached by telephone.

In summary, the Defendant is defending this claim due to the following reasons:

a)     The Defendant attempted to pay the charge and had this payment rejected.

b)     Due to the documented attempted payment by the Defendant, the Claimant cannot evidence that the Defendant did not intend to pay their debt.

c)     Debt Recovery Plus, on behalf of the Claimant, acted in a harassing manner in order to extort further monies from the Defendant.

d)     The Defendant believes that the Claimant deliberately acted in an obstructive manner in an attempt to obtain further revenue.

Thank you so much in advance for any feedback!

 

Coupon-mad

Which parking firm and which 'barely legal' firm?

Remove this (no saying that the driver only paid £2, given that the driver wasn't you. Stay silent on this):

Fortunately the driver had a small amount of cash (£2.00) on their person, so purchased a ticket to this amount allowing them to park for two hours. However, the course overran and they were unable to return to the car by this time. If there had been other options for payment they would have happily purchased a ticket to cover the cost of parking for a longer period.

Change this:

4. The driver planned to change driver details from the Defendant’s name and appeal but missed the deadline due to illness. Therefore a cheque dated 12/11/2021 was sent to the Claimant for full payment of the invoice of £60.00. 

to this:

4.  The Claimant actively misled the Defendant (registered keeper but not driver) into believing that there was a legal 'deadline' to transfer liability to the driver.  Due to illness, the Defendant missed the arbitrary deadline stated in the paperwork and was duped into thinking they were too late to name the driver. Feeling intimidated and that the situation was hopeless, under protest (but without admission of liability) the Defendant sent a £60 cheque dated 12/11/2021 to the Claimant to make it go away. 

5.  However, the cheque was returned by the Claimant, stating that the matter had been passed onto Debt Recovery Plus. Despite that aggressive third party firm operating on a no-win-no-fee basis (and as such no additional costs were incurred) they sent a series of harassing letters for several months, continuing to add disproportionate fees to the original charge. These extra charges were not explained or justified and the Defendant did not and does not admit any liability for any sum at all. The Claimant was not charged any fee by Debt Recovery Plus who failed to collect the extortionate sum they had inflated it to.  Despite this, the claim remains exaggerated.

6.  The Defendant has only just learnt, since this claim was served, that in fact there is no 28 day deadline in law to transfer liability. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 , Schedule 4, allows a keeper to name the driver at any time 'before court action commences'.  Had this Claimant told the truth at the start, the Defendant could have transferred liability to the driver who would have been sent their own PCN at the original rate. 

7. It is not admitted that the Claimant has the right to recover the parking charge from the registered keeper in this case and the Claimant is put to strict proof.

(Then remove everything else you had from the word 'numerous' down, and then add the rest of the template defence in full and re-number it all below your added paragraphs).

KeithP

What is the Issue Date on your County Court Claim Form?

Upon what date did you file an Acknowledgment of Service?
Your MCOL Claim History will have the definitive answer to that.

caro2022

Coupon-mad said:

Which parking firm and which 'barely legal' firm?

Remove this (no saying that the driver only paid £2, given that the driver wasn't you. Stay silent on this):

Fortunately the driver had a small amount of cash (£2.00) on their person, so purchased a ticket to this amount allowing them to park for two hours. However, the course overran and they were unable to return to the car by this time. If there had been other options for payment they would have happily purchased a ticket to cover the cost of parking for a longer period.

Change this:

4. The driver planned to change driver details from the Defendant’s name and appeal but missed the deadline due to illness. Therefore a cheque dated 12/11/2021 was sent to the Claimant for full payment of the invoice of £60.00. 

to this:

4.  The Claimant actively misled the Defendant (registered keeper but not driver) into believing that there was a legal 'deadline' to transfer liability to the driver.  Due to illness, the Defendant missed the arbitrary deadline stated in the paperwork and was duped into thinking they were too late to name the driver. Feeling intimidated and that the situation was hopeless, under protest (but without admission of liability) the Defendant sent a £60 cheque dated 12/11/2021 to the Claimant to make it go away. 

5.  However, the cheque was returned by the Claimant, stating that the matter had been passed onto Debt Recovery Plus. Despite that aggressive third party firm operating on a no-win-no-fee basis (and as such no additional costs were incurred) they sent a series of harassing letters for several months, continuing to add disproportionate fees to the original charge. These extra charges were not explained or justified and the Defendant did not and does not admit any liability for any sum at all. The Claimant was not charged any fee by Debt Recovery Plus who failed to collect the extortionate sum they had inflated it to.  Despite this, the claim remains exaggerated.

6.  The Defendant has only just learnt, since this claim was served, that in fact there is no 28 day deadline in law to transfer liability. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 , Schedule 4, allows a keeper to name the driver at any time 'before court action commences'.  Had this Claimant told the truth at the start, the Defendant could have transferred liability to the driver who would have been sent their own PCN at the original rate. 

7. It is not admitted that the Claimant has the right to recover the parking charge from the registered keeper in this case and the Claimant is put to strict proof.

(Then remove everything else you had from the word 'numerous' down, and then add the rest of the template defence in full and re-number it all below your added paragraphs).

Thank you so much for your reply! The parking firm is Local Parking Security Ltd and the debt collectors are Debt Recovery Plus. 

I'll make all the changes you've suggested - just to clarify, shall I leave this bit in? - 

"3. 

The driver of the vehicle was using this car park in order to attend an educational health and safety course. The ticket payment machine on site only accepted cash, there being no option to pay by phone or card, despite the fact that cash payments were being discouraged during this period of Covid-19.

The car park was located in a beach/rural area so there was no means of obtaining cash, and no alternative area in which to park."

caro2022

KeithP said:

What is the Issue Date on your County Court Claim Form?

Upon what date did you file an Acknowledgment of Service?
Your MCOL Claim History will have the definitive answer to that.

The issue date is 9th August, and I filed the acknowledgement on 18th August.

KeithP

caro2022 said:

KeithP said:

What is the Issue Date on your County Court Claim Form?

Upon what date did you file an Acknowledgment of Service?
Your MCOL Claim History will have the definitive answer to that.

The issue date is 9th August, and I filed the acknowledgement on 18th August.

With a Claim Issue Date of 9th August, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 12th September 2022 to file your Defence.

That's over two weeks away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence and it is good to see you are not leaving it to the last minute.

To create a Defence, and then file a Defence by email, look at the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Don't miss the deadline for filing a Defence.

Do not try and file a Defence via the MoneyClaimOnline website. Once an Acknowledgment of Service has been filed, the MCOL website should be treated as 'read only'.

Coupon-mad

Thank you so much for your reply! The parking firm is Local Parking Security Ltd and the debt collectors are Debt Recovery Plus. 

No, I asked which 'barely legal' firm filed the claim?

And only remove exactly what I quoted and said to remove.

caro2022

@Coupon-mad oh sorry, do you mean the solicitors? It is Gladstone's. 

I only asked about paragraph 3 as the bit you quoted that I should remove was the second part of the paragraph, so I was just wondering if I should leave the first part in? Thank you

caro2022

Hello, just a quick question - I have received my directions questionnaire in the post, but it has arrived really late due to (I assume) postal strikes plus our local delivery office has had staffing difficulties. As a result I don't have long to get it back to them. Can I submit this form online or does it need to be posted? If it does, I'll send by guaranteed delivery to the court; is there any point in sending by guaranteed delivery also to the claimant? thanks

Umkomaas

Download a copy, fill it in online, submit it online, access your MCOL history to check receipt. Send during business hours only, never at a weekend. 

Trainerman

You can email to both Court and Claimant, but I would make sure that you do it between 9am and 4pm