Civil enforcement ltd

BowieBoy333

It's taken longer than I hoped, but I think my defence is finished.. 

. It is admitted that the defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle WN5etc.

.The defendant arrived at the car park in question at 07:56 on 24/01/2022.
The defendant proceeded to use the online Phone & Pay app to purchase a parking ticket.
However,the initial,and subsequent attempts to pay for a ticket we're met with the onscreen word 'ERROR'. 
Believing the problem could be with their own device,the defendant restarted the device,and again attempted to pay using the Phone & Pay app. The word 'ERROR' was still displaying.
The defendant then telephoned the Phone & Pay company directly to inform them of the issue, but an automated message informed them the company was "out of office" and to call again between the business hours of "09:30 and 17:30".
The defendant was left with no choice but to continue the attempts to purchase an online ticket. This included having to uninstall and reinstall the Phone & Pay app in the hope it would function. This procedure required the defendant fill in all personal details again, including payment card information.All of which took up more time.
At no point did the defendant leave the vehicle or the car park, choosing instead to remain with the vehicle in the hope an attendant or the land owner would come by,but neither did.
Eventually after more failed attempts,the Phone & Pay app appeared to function once more,and the defendant was able to finally purchase a valid ticket.
Clearly, the defendant intended to pay, and did pay for his session. But the ability to meet the terms was frustrated by the poor software being offered by the claimant.
All reasonable endeavors were made to comply, and payment was made in full.
There is no loss to recover and the claimant is aware of this fact, yet continues to pursue the defendant unreasonably.



??? What do you all think? Any good?
Tips and advice welcome of course 

BowieBoy333

Coupon-mad said:

BowieBoy333 said:

Coupon-mad said:

There is no point adding anything to a defence about your current anxiety this is causing.

Just put down some facts about the car park and the fact you use it and always pay, and search the forum for defence frustration (change the search filter to 'NEWEST').  Never read really old stuff.

Copy what someone else did in a defence before you, in 2022.  It is easier than you think.

I was just reading through some cases on the page you guided me to .
I can't seem to find one that directly relates to  my case of frustration, which is down to software error . Am I missing the obvious here?
Apologies for being a pain in the ***

You won't find a match for your case; that's not needed.  I was merely showing you how to word frustration of contract as a concept.  Stop looking for an exact match. You simply write your own 'facts' bit of course.

95% of the defence is already written for you.  It's like having someone else write your homework, then you just add your name & details at the top and an introduction to make it personal, then sign & date it.

Much easier than you are making it.

It's taken longer than I hoped, but I think my defence is finished.. 

. It is admitted that the defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle WN5etc.

.The defendant arrived at the car park in question at 07:56 on 24/01/2022.
The defendant proceeded to use the online Phone & Pay app to purchase a parking ticket.
However,the initial,and subsequent attempts to pay for a ticket we're met with the onscreen word 'ERROR'. 
Believing the problem could be with their own device,the defendant restarted the device,and again attempted to pay using the Phone & Pay app. The word 'ERROR' was still displaying.
The defendant then telephoned the Phone & Pay company directly to inform them of the issue, but an automated message informed them the company was "out of office" and to call again between the business hours of "09:30 and 17:30".
The defendant was left with no choice but to continue the attempts to purchase an online ticket. This included having to uninstall and reinstall the Phone & Pay app in the hope it would function. This procedure required the defendant fill in all personal details again, including payment card information.All of which took up more time.
At no point did the defendant leave the vehicle or the car park, choosing instead to remain with the vehicle in the hope an attendant or the land owner would come by,but neither did.
Eventually after more failed attempts,the Phone & Pay app appeared to function once more,and the defendant was able to finally purchase a valid ticket.
Clearly, the defendant intended to pay, and did pay for his session. But the ability to meet the terms was frustrated by the poor software being offered by the claimant.
All reasonable endeavors were made to comply, and payment was made in full.
There is no loss to recover and the claimant is aware of this fact, yet continues to pursue the defendant unreasonably.



??? What do you all think? Any good?
Tips and advice welcome of course 

Coupon-mad

All good except 'endeavors' is spelt wrong. We are not in America!

BowieBoy333

Coupon-mad said:

All good except 'endeavors' is spelt wrong. We are not in America!

I was worried I may have rambled on a bit too much, but I couldn't find a way to condense it further after numerous rewrites.
Thank you so much for reading through it for me.  I truly appreciate it. And I will double check all spelling when I add it to the template defence.

Le_Kirk

That reads more like a witness statement than a defence, which should be short, punchy and comprise legal/technical  arguments.   You also have used "we're" instead of "were". There needs to be a space after a comma!  Also every paragraph requires a number. Can it be assumed that this will slot into the standard template defence? 

BowieBoy333

Le_Kirk said:

That reads more like a witness statement than a defence, which should be short, punchy and comprise legal/technical  arguments.   You also have used "we're" instead of "were". There needs to be a space after a comma!  Also every paragraph requires a number. Can it be assumed that this will slot into the standard template defence? 

I did wonder somewhat if it was long winded, but I genuinely can't seem to edit it down without losing important points. That's how it seems to me. 
I'm aware of the spelling errors with autocorrect sadly, but thanks for reminding me though .
I'm wanting to get this sent off tomorrow so if there's any tips or ideas you think I should take on board, please feel free to share them . I welcome all help on this.

Coupon-mad

I think it's fine; you are making important points.

BowieBoy333

Coupon-mad said:

I think it's fine; you are making important points.

Thank you.

BowieBoy333

Coupon-mad said:

I think it's fine; you are making important points.

So, my defence was sent off via email. Part one complete I guess.
I wasn't able to send a copy to CEL though, because I simply couldn't find an email address. Do you think It matters? Or will a copy now be sent to them anyway from the court?

Boat_to_Bolivia

BowieBoy333 said:

Coupon-mad said:

I think it's fine; you are making important points.

So, my defence was sent off via email. Part one complete I guess.
I wasn't able to send a copy to CEL though, because I simply couldn't find an email address. Do you think It matters? Or will a copy now be sent to them anyway from the court?

Don't worry, it's up to CCBC to forward your defence. So long as you got an acknowledgment email from the court, all is well. 

You can check your MCOL history in the next week or so to be sure it's been received.