Parking in my own spot. N1 Claim form received.

Mouse007

You could add after 8

In Pace v Mr N C6GF14F0 [2016] it was found that the parking company could not override the tenant's right to park by requiring a permit to park.

In Link Parking v Ms P C7GF50J7 [2016] it was also found that the parking company could not override the tenant's right to park by requiring a permit to park.

You will then be able to include the transcripts from these cases at the Witness Statement stage

ps, we don't need to see the template paragraphs (11 onwards) unless you have changed something

Coupon-mad

13 is technically wrong and I should adjust it - but let's see what the Public Consultation and Draft Impact Assessment brings.

The added fake DRA fee is not 'banned' yet.  But leave that in!

Mouse007

You could cut 7 and 8 down a bit, for example does this read better?

7. It is denied that the Defendant were was in breach of any parking conditions or were was  not permitted to park. in circumstances where an Express permission to park had been granted to the Defendant permitting the above-mentioned vehicle to be parked by the then current occupier of XXXX, whose tenancy agreement permits the parking of vehicle(s) on land. The Defendant avers that There was an absolute entitlement to park deriving from the terms of the lease tenancy agreement *, which cannot be fettered by any alleged parking terms by a third party. The lease tenancy agreement * terms provide the right to park a vehicle in the relevant allocated bay, without limitation as to type of vehicle, ownership of vehicle, the user of the vehicle or the requirement to display a parking permit. A copy of the lease will be provided to the Court, together with witness evidence that prior permission to park had been given.

8. The Defendant avers that The operator’s signs cannot (i) override the existing rights enjoyed by residents and their visitors and (ii) that parking easements cannot retrospectively and unilaterally be restricted where provided for within the lease tenancy agreement *. The Defendant will rely upon the judgments on appeal of HHJ Harris QC in Jopson v Homeguard Services Ltd (2016) and of Sir Christopher Slade in K-Sultana Saeed v Plustrade Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 2011. The Court will be referred to further similar fact cases in the event that this matter proceeds to trial.

Then add Pace and Link cases as I suggested above.

* You initially say tenancy agreement and then switch to lease - just be consistent.

Later comes a witness statement in which you can bring back the detail, for example my son's ones are here

Defence

Witness Statement

Similar but not identical circumstances

Svendaf

Many thanks everyone, defence submitted.

KeithP

Svendaf said:

Many thanks everyone, defence submitted.

Hopefully you will have received an automated email receipt for that.

If not, it would be prudent to email your Defence to the CCBC again on Tuesday morning during working hours, to avoid unnecessary complications further down the line. 

Mouse007

Alarm bells were ringing earlier this evening. The Thread is “Parking in my own spot” but the Defence has shifted to permission to park by the then current occupier. Which is it?

I so hope our OP is not another one of those who disappears for now thinking this stage is all done and dusted, only to reappear some weeks later squealing about the defence having not been received because (despite advice to the contrary) they filed outside office hours and didn’t bother to check - acknowledgement of receipt!

They then reappear with a default CCJ to set aside. Adding to the toll of OP’s who skimmed through the advice, glanced over the detail and assumed all is good to skip on back to the party of life. Oh well, time will tell. They may be lucky, who knows?

I’m at that stage in my life when the Children only get in touch when they want something, like money or a fix to another consequence of their arrogance (sorry mid 20 something innocence, arrogance twas the teenage years).

Experience tells me, this might not be over.

Snayl86

Mouse007 said:

You could add after 8

In Pace v Mr N C6GF14F0 [2016] it was found that the parking company could not override the tenant's right to park by requiring a permit to park.

In Link Parking v Ms P C7GF50J7 [2016] it was also found that the parking company could not override the tenant's right to park by requiring a permit to park.

You will then be able to include the transcripts from these cases at the Witness Statement stage

ps, we don't need to see the template paragraphs (11 onwards) unless you have changed something

Out of interest, has anyone got links for these cases now? The ones @ parking prankster are broken

Coupon-mad

No, they've disappeared unless @bargepole has them.

Snayl86

Coupon-mad said:

No, they've disappeared unless @bargepole has them.

I've managed to locate a copy of C7GF50J7. Have applied to Croydon courts for the transcript of Pace v Mr N C6GF14F0, will see what happens.

B789

Snayl86 said:

Coupon-mad said:

No, they've disappeared unless @bargepole has them.

I've managed to locate a copy of C7GF50J7. Have applied to Croydon courts for the transcript of Pace v Mr N C6GF14F0, will see what happens.

Can you please upload a copy of the Wrexham transcript so that we can get it archived and available? I was about to send off an EX107 to Croydon myself but if you have already done so, can you also post a link to a copy of that case for the same reason?