£3000 County Court Claim from Park Direct UK

CluelessDefendant

Coupon-mad said:

CluelessDefendant said:

B789 said:

Don't forget that as part of your defence you can request that the claim is struck out if the PoC is not adequate.

The defendant respectfully would like to draw the courts attention noting that:

1. The Particulars of Claim are entirely inadequate, in that they fail to particularise (a) the contractual term(s) relied upon; (b) the specifics of any alleged breach of contract; or (c) the alleged loss

2. The Defendant is unable, on the basis of the Particulars within the Claim Form, to understand properly and specifically what case is being pursued

3. The Particulars appear to be in breach of CPR 16.4, 16PD3 and 16PD7, and fail to "state all facts necessary for the purpose of formulating a complete cause of action"

4. The claim has been issued via Money Claims Online and, as a result, is subject to a character limit for the Particulars of Claim section of the Claim Form

5. In the opinion of the Defendant it ought to have been entirely possible to deal with the matters outlined above within that character limit but for the fact that generic wording appears to have been applied

6. In the event that it was or is impossible to properly set out the key parts of the claim within the character limit then it was incumbant upon the Claimant to file and serve separate Particulars of Claim within 14 days per 16PD.3

7. The guidance for completing Money Claims Online confirms this and clearly states: "If you do not have enough space to explain your claim online and you need to serve extra, more detailed particulars on the defendant, tick the box that appears after the statement 'you may also send detailed particulars direct to the defendant.'"

AND UPON no further particulars having been filed

AND UPON it having been entirely within the Claimant's Solicitors' gift to properly plead the claim at the outset

AND UPON the claim being for a sum, well within the small claims limit, such that the Defendant considers it disproportionate and at odds with the overriding objective (in the context of a failure by the Claimant to properly comply with rules and practice directions) to order further particulars, to which a further defence might be filed, followed by further referral to a Judge for directions and allocation

IT IS REQUESTED that:-

1 The Claim is struck out

Or words to that effect. At least bring it to the judges attention for consideration.

Coupon-mad said:

DCB Legal were dispatched to chase me up but the CCC has come directly from the parking company.

Really, are you sure it's not via DCBLegal?

Please copy & paste the Particulars of claim here, redacting your VRM.

The PoC:

"Park Direct UK Ltd are a private parking enforcement company employed by the landowners for the enforcement and control of parking on their land (Defendants housing estate and tennis court parking adjacent to it) to prevent abuse of their parking terms & conditions. Vehicle registration number XXXXXXX whereby the defendant was the legal registered keeper, were issued with 15 Parking Charge Notices (totalling £2550) (inclusive of debt recovery charges) for breaching the advertised terms of parking. PCN issued: XXXXX x15. PCN's/ notice to keepers and reminders have been issued to the keeper. All PCN's have been issued to the keeper. All PCN's have been issued in accordance with the Protection of Freedom Act 2012."

Yes, they made a typo in this short claim, do people not spell check anymore? 

The signed claimant at the bottom is "Park Direct UK Ltd" so I do believe it's them who've made the claim.

Oh! How rare. A case filed by Park Direct!

No solicitor was involved, so no immediate fast danger of bailiffs but that could happen later.

Did that claim list all 15 PCNs and dates?

No?

Or did they send further Particulars the week or two after that claim? 

If not, TELL Contestor Legal as they might have grounds to appeal because your defence presumably pointed out that the POC were inadequate and defective?

I've been trying to find the first court claim letter to send to them in the email I'm getting together, unfortunately no luck.. 

Coupon-mad

Send them your defence and point out paras 12-16 specifically, which the Judge ignored.

YOU RAISED THE POINT THAT THE POC WERE SO SPARSE ON DETAILS THAT IT MADE IT HARD TO KNOW WHAT ALLEGATIONS YOU WERE DEALING WITH.

 And send them the POC which you quoted above and tell them if Park Direct DID NOT send further Particulars listing all 15 details and dates. Did they?

CluelessDefendant

Coupon-mad said:

CluelessDefendant said:

B789 said:

Don't forget that as part of your defence you can request that the claim is struck out if the PoC is not adequate.

The defendant respectfully would like to draw the courts attention noting that:

1. The Particulars of Claim are entirely inadequate, in that they fail to particularise (a) the contractual term(s) relied upon; (b) the specifics of any alleged breach of contract; or (c) the alleged loss

2. The Defendant is unable, on the basis of the Particulars within the Claim Form, to understand properly and specifically what case is being pursued

3. The Particulars appear to be in breach of CPR 16.4, 16PD3 and 16PD7, and fail to "state all facts necessary for the purpose of formulating a complete cause of action"

4. The claim has been issued via Money Claims Online and, as a result, is subject to a character limit for the Particulars of Claim section of the Claim Form

5. In the opinion of the Defendant it ought to have been entirely possible to deal with the matters outlined above within that character limit but for the fact that generic wording appears to have been applied

6. In the event that it was or is impossible to properly set out the key parts of the claim within the character limit then it was incumbant upon the Claimant to file and serve separate Particulars of Claim within 14 days per 16PD.3

7. The guidance for completing Money Claims Online confirms this and clearly states: "If you do not have enough space to explain your claim online and you need to serve extra, more detailed particulars on the defendant, tick the box that appears after the statement 'you may also send detailed particulars direct to the defendant.'"

AND UPON no further particulars having been filed

AND UPON it having been entirely within the Claimant's Solicitors' gift to properly plead the claim at the outset

AND UPON the claim being for a sum, well within the small claims limit, such that the Defendant considers it disproportionate and at odds with the overriding objective (in the context of a failure by the Claimant to properly comply with rules and practice directions) to order further particulars, to which a further defence might be filed, followed by further referral to a Judge for directions and allocation

IT IS REQUESTED that:-

1 The Claim is struck out

Or words to that effect. At least bring it to the judges attention for consideration.

Coupon-mad said:

DCB Legal were dispatched to chase me up but the CCC has come directly from the parking company.

Really, are you sure it's not via DCBLegal?

Please copy & paste the Particulars of claim here, redacting your VRM.

The PoC:

"Park Direct UK Ltd are a private parking enforcement company employed by the landowners for the enforcement and control of parking on their land (Defendants housing estate and tennis court parking adjacent to it) to prevent abuse of their parking terms & conditions. Vehicle registration number XXXXXXX whereby the defendant was the legal registered keeper, were issued with 15 Parking Charge Notices (totalling £2550) (inclusive of debt recovery charges) for breaching the advertised terms of parking. PCN issued: XXXXX x15. PCN's/ notice to keepers and reminders have been issued to the keeper. All PCN's have been issued to the keeper. All PCN's have been issued in accordance with the Protection of Freedom Act 2012."

Yes, they made a typo in this short claim, do people not spell check anymore? 

The signed claimant at the bottom is "Park Direct UK Ltd" so I do believe it's them who've made the claim.

Oh! How rare. A case filed by Park Direct!

No solicitor was involved, so no immediate fast danger of bailiffs but that could happen later.

Did that claim list all 15 PCNs and dates?

No?

Or did they send further Particulars the week or two after that claim? 

If not, TELL Contestor Legal as they might have grounds to appeal because your defence presumably pointed out that the POC were inadequate and defective?

That's the only PoC ever filed by them, there was no follow up

CluelessDefendant

Coupon-mad said:

Send them your defence and point out paras 12-16 specifically, which the Judge ignored.

YOU RAISED THE POINT THAT THE POC WERE SO SPARSE ON DETAILS THAT IT MADE IT HARD TO KNOW WHAT ALLEGATIONS YOU WERE DEALING WITH.

 And send them the POC which you quoted above and tell them if Park Direct DID NOT send further Particulars listing all 15 details and dates. Did they?

well to be fair I think the judge ignored my whole defence aha