Court Claim form did not receive and not able to Acknowledge receipt of claim online please HELP

zeljko

Coupon-mad said:

Put it as a Preliminary Matter, paragraph 2 onwards, obviously stating the Claim number and Judge's name.

If you send a pm to @patient_dream he might still have the BW WS and date of hearing and the Defendant's surname, because he's local to you and had involvement in the case too.

Under footer they have:

"Britannia Parking is a registered Trading Name of Britannia Parking Group Limited and any of its wholly owned subsidiaries"

But they never again provided proof  contract/agreement between these two entities .

But that's not the two entities we talked about. That's not relevant to the sign or NTK.

Great idea, I have send PM. Do I need General Form of Judgment as Exibit?

zeljko

Hi,
I have sent my WS as last version posted in my previous posts.
Today (last day for WS to be delivered) I got WS from BW Legal.

I have few question which points I should point when attend hearing.

1.I got agreement between Britannia Parking Service ltd and  XXXXXX (they did not want to disclose supplier???)


Can they hide supplier? And 2nd Britannia Parking Service ltd is not par of AoS and they  are not on The signs and Notice to Keeper.
Is this already a wining point?

I got also confuse that Claimant never provided full defence, they are using Skeleton argument because I have using your help :-(

 

They are informing court of using template defence, I am not allow ask for help?


In their WS they lie they are part of BDP/AoS, I have double check again and Britannia Parking Service ltd is not part of BDP/AoS...


Is this true they have been part of BDP in Dec 2020?


We have been in lockdown and Pub was close, how I can authorised vehicle. Should I point this or?


Full WS with Skeleton Argument  from BWLegal can be find below:

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/xftmww2qc9duavxow2dg4/BWLegal-Witnessed-statement_reduce.pdf?rlkey=8wsovchltm2j5287i65694rv2&dl=0

I have another claim for same parking offense just with different car. I will use same defence and WS, if you think I can add any other points now when I know their WS.

Castle

zeljko said:

Castle said:

They can be a subsidiary of another Ltd company; but, there needs to be a contract/agreement between Britannia Parking Services Ltd and Britannia Parking Group Ltd.
(Britannia Parking Services Ltd are not AOS members).

Under footer they have:

"Britannia Parking is a registered Trading Name of Britannia Parking Group Limited and any of its wholly owned subsidiaries"

But they never again provided proof  contract/agreement between these two entities  

There's no such thing as a "registered Trading Name"; but, "Britannia Parking" is a registered Trade Mark of ONLY the "Britannia Parking Group Ltd".

zeljko

Castle said:

zeljko said:

Castle said:

They can be a subsidiary of another Ltd company; but, there needs to be a contract/agreement between Britannia Parking Services Ltd and Britannia Parking Group Ltd.
(Britannia Parking Services Ltd are not AOS members).

Under footer they have:

"Britannia Parking is a registered Trading Name of Britannia Parking Group Limited and any of its wholly owned subsidiaries"

But they never again provided proof  contract/agreement between these two entities  

There's no such thing as a "registered Trading Name"; but, "Britannia Parking" is a registered Trade Mark of ONLY the "Britannia Parking Group Ltd".

Sure, I will put this in my short list of points. 

Le_Kirk

Can they hide supplier? 

They haven't hidden supplier, they have left CUSTOMER blank.  All through your questions you refer to BDP/AoS Do you mean BPA?  In one case on this forum a judge, when told by the claimant that the defendant had used a template defence, replied "so what?"  It is funny that they accuse you of using a template defence and they go on to use a template witness statement!

zeljko

Le_Kirk said:

Can they hide supplier? 

They haven't hidden supplier, they have left CUSTOMER blank.  All through your questions you refer to BDP/AoS Do you mean BPA?  In one case on this forum a judge, when told by the claimant that the defendant had used a template defence, replied "so what?"  It is funny that they accuse you of using a template defence and they go on to use a template witness statement!

Sorry, typo BPA/AoS.
But leaving CUSTOMER blank mean no Landowner Authority, but why BWLegal continue with this charade. Could they really mislead the judge and win

Le_Kirk

Let's see what they say when the judge asks them outright who is the customer and why they have blanked it.  Of course they will say (as they did in their skelly) that is is sensitive confidential financial information!

Coupon-mad

This is your SECOND AND MAIN POINT to draw to the Judge's attention after you've taken the Judge to read CEL v Chan (woeful POC):

Britannia Parking Service ltd is not part of AoS and they  are not on The signs and Notice to Keeper.  Is this already a wining point?

Yes. The contract is offered on signs by the wrong Ltd company.

They are not the same legal entity.  One Ltd Company cannot be an offshoot of another.

Therefore the Claimant is operating without landowner authority, which is a clear breach of DVLA rules and a breach of para 7 of the BPA CoP.

patient_dream

zeljko said:

Coupon-mad said:

Then your WS should respond to that.
Use this case which ended up: Britannia 0  'Icicle Boy from MSE' 1

  

DISTRICT JUDGE BISHOP
READING COUNTY COURT

CLAIM NUMBER F1DP7C2  

Summary below (ironic that this BW WS was written/signed off by Jackson Yamba who is now firmly on the good side):

Britannia are still filing cases where the landowner authority is in the name Britannia Parking Services Ltd yet the NTK and claim was from the 'other Britannia Ltd company:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6008854/britania-parking-pcn-bournemouth/p5

As this was at Reading, a forum member went along with the D, but he showed me BW Legal's WS a few days ago and I spotted the issue and alerted them to it.

BW Legal had written (sounds familiar?):

''for the avoidance of doubt, Britannia Parking are part of the Britannia Parking Group Ltd''

and someone had attached the NTK and all the letters, carefully or negligently (somehow, but very obviously) using each letter to OVERLAY and in fact cover up the footer on every single one above it in the stack, then they chopped off the bottom one... astonishing.

We all know what was actually on the footer of each Britannia letter that BW Legal didn't want us to notice and had chopped off...yep, the Britannia Parking Group Ltd company name and number.

Problem for them was, the contract (sign) at this site is in the name of Britannia Parking Services Ltd and gave their - completely different - company number.  

I saw this example when I got my 1st NTK 2020 :-) .
I also have hearing at Reading Court against BW LEGAL.

I can add this inside my WS but where should be best location, under : Facts and Sequence of events, Defence or Conclusion?

Below is part which I wanted to or?

4) There is no evidence of Landowner Authority - the operator is put to strict proof of full compliance with the BPA Code of Practice. Britannia Parking Group Ltd (No 08182990) issued the NTK, but the “Landowner” contract is with Britannia Parking Services Ltd (No 08187238), which is a different company. Therefore, there is no evidence that Britannia Parking Group are authorised by the landowner to issue PCNs/NTKs.
a. If the “parking charge” listed in the particulars of claim is to be considered, a written agreement between Defendant and Claimant then under 7.3, the particulars fail to include “a copy of the contract or documents constituting the agreement”.
6) As previously stated, Britannia Parking Group are not the lawful occupier of the land. The Defendant has reasonable belief that they do not have the authority to issue charges on this land in their own name and that they have no rights to bring action regarding this claim.
a. The Claimant is not the landowner and is merely an agent acting on behalf of the landowner and has failed to demonstrate their legal standing to form a contract.
b. The Claimant is not the landowner and suffers no loss whatsoever as a result of a vehicle parking at the location in question.
c. The Claimant is put to proof that it has sufficient interest in the land or that there are specific terms in its contract to bring an action on its own behalf. As a third party agent, the Claimant may not pursue any charge

Hi, I have sent you a PM

Britannia .. Reading County Court

zeljko

patient_dream said:

zeljko said:

Coupon-mad said:

Then your WS should respond to that.
Use this case which ended up: Britannia 0  'Icicle Boy from MSE' 1

  

DISTRICT JUDGE BISHOP
READING COUNTY COURT

CLAIM NUMBER F1DP7C2  

Summary below (ironic that this BW WS was written/signed off by Jackson Yamba who is now firmly on the good side):

Britannia are still filing cases where the landowner authority is in the name Britannia Parking Services Ltd yet the NTK and claim was from the 'other Britannia Ltd company:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6008854/britania-parking-pcn-bournemouth/p5

As this was at Reading, a forum member went along with the D, but he showed me BW Legal's WS a few days ago and I spotted the issue and alerted them to it.

BW Legal had written (sounds familiar?):

''for the avoidance of doubt, Britannia Parking are part of the Britannia Parking Group Ltd''

and someone had attached the NTK and all the letters, carefully or negligently (somehow, but very obviously) using each letter to OVERLAY and in fact cover up the footer on every single one above it in the stack, then they chopped off the bottom one... astonishing.

We all know what was actually on the footer of each Britannia letter that BW Legal didn't want us to notice and had chopped off...yep, the Britannia Parking Group Ltd company name and number.

Problem for them was, the contract (sign) at this site is in the name of Britannia Parking Services Ltd and gave their - completely different - company number.  

I saw this example when I got my 1st NTK 2020 :-) .
I also have hearing at Reading Court against BW LEGAL.

I can add this inside my WS but where should be best location, under : Facts and Sequence of events, Defence or Conclusion?

Below is part which I wanted to or?

4) There is no evidence of Landowner Authority - the operator is put to strict proof of full compliance with the BPA Code of Practice. Britannia Parking Group Ltd (No 08182990) issued the NTK, but the “Landowner” contract is with Britannia Parking Services Ltd (No 08187238), which is a different company. Therefore, there is no evidence that Britannia Parking Group are authorised by the landowner to issue PCNs/NTKs.
a. If the “parking charge” listed in the particulars of claim is to be considered, a written agreement between Defendant and Claimant then under 7.3, the particulars fail to include “a copy of the contract or documents constituting the agreement”.
6) As previously stated, Britannia Parking Group are not the lawful occupier of the land. The Defendant has reasonable belief that they do not have the authority to issue charges on this land in their own name and that they have no rights to bring action regarding this claim.
a. The Claimant is not the landowner and is merely an agent acting on behalf of the landowner and has failed to demonstrate their legal standing to form a contract.
b. The Claimant is not the landowner and suffers no loss whatsoever as a result of a vehicle parking at the location in question.
c. The Claimant is put to proof that it has sufficient interest in the land or that there are specific terms in its contract to bring an action on its own behalf. As a third party agent, the Claimant may not pursue any charge

Hi, I have sent you a PM

Britannia .. Reading County Court

I can use for 2nd claim your example. For my 2nd Claim hearing is schedule for 1st Dec.