Need advice on creating a defence - Received claim form after missing POPLA appeal

zubz91

KeithP said:

zubz91 said:

Coupon-mad said:

Yep we didn't need to see the template POC.

Just use the defence linked already (obviously your para 3 will explain about the puncture) and add in Jopson v Homeguard as an extra paragraph.

What's the date of issue of the claim form?

date of Issue is 19th May - AOS filed on 3rd June

As mentioned earlier, you do indeed have until 4pm on 21st June to file a Defence, but there might be something useful here...

With a Claim Issue Date of 19th May, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Wednesday 21st June 2023 to file your Defence.

That's over two weeks away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence, but please don't leave 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'.

So, I did not listen to your advice very well in terms of timing, due to being very busy with my sick mother . I have only realised that I have to submit today by 4 PM. 

I would be grateful if you can confirm if I am good to submit the defence.

These are the edited paragraphs

1. The Defendant acknowledges that on the relevant date, they were both the Hirer and Driver of the vehicle in question.

2. While departing from home after work, the Defendant noticed a warning on the dashboard indicating a loss of air in one of the vehicle's tires. This prompted the Defendant to swiftly turn left into a nearby side road, driven by a slight sense of panic, in order to inspect the tire. Upon examination, it became apparent to the Defendant that the issue was not simply a loss of pressure but rather a puncture. Sensibly, the Defendant sought to avoid obstructing the road, considering the narrow nature of the street and its two-way traffic. Consequently, the Defendant chose to find the nearest available parking space and promptly contacted a puncture repair specialist for immediate assistance.

3. It should be noted that the vehicle in question was not parked in the conventional sense, but rather temporarily waiting for repair as it had become inoperable due to the punctured tire. Furthermore, it is important to highlight that the Defendant did not possess a spare tire that could have been used as a replacement. Approximately three hours later, a professional tire repair technician arrived and successfully remedied the puncture. The Defendant has provided evidence in the form of an invoice, which was previously shared with the claimant during the initial parking appeal process, confirming the repair service.

4. In addition, the signage pertaining to the parking area utilized by the Defendant was not easily visible, as it was not situated in close proximity to the designated space. Instead, the signage appeared to be positioned in areas that the Defendant reasonably believed were unrelated to the specific space in question

5.     Attention is drawn to Jopson v Homeguard, case number B9GF0A9E. His Honour Judge J Harris QC determined that coping with some vicissitude of short duration such as replacing a punctured tyre is not parking. This was an appeal court case and thus persuasive on the lower courts.

Also should I add the below picture from google to the appendix?

zubz91

B789 said:

zubz91 said:

Coupon-mad said:

Yep we didn't need to see the template POC.

Just use the defence linked already (obviously your para 3 will explain about the puncture) and add in Jopson v Homeguard as an extra paragraph.

What's the date of issue of the claim form?

date of Issue is 19th May - AOS filed on 3rd June

@KeithP will confirm but you should have up to 4 pm on Wednesday 21st June to submit your defence.

Just add the following paragraph to the exampled Defence and renumber all subsequent paragraphs sequentially.

Attention is drawn to Jopson v Homeguard, case number B9GF0A9E. His Honour Judge J Harris QC determined that coping with some vicissitude of short duration such as replacing a punctured tyre is not parking. This was an appeal court case and thus persuasive on the lower courts.

Can you please check the above post Thank you

Coupon-mad

Tyre not "tire."

You don't attach ANY evidence at all.  This is defence stage.  Not evidence stage yet.  

You will have to re-number the defence we showed you to fit all that in.

Even though you are using a slightly longer defence as we signposted you to already (33 or 34 paragraphs) please also refer to the Template Defence sticky thread for how/where to email this, and what to expect next.

DO NOT try to put the defence in via MCOL.

zubz91

Coupon-mad said:

Tyre not "tire."

You don't attach ANY evidence at all.  This is defence stage.  Not evidence stage yet.  

You will have to re-number the defence we showed you to fit all that in.

Even though you are using a slightly longer defence as we signposted you to already (33 or 34 paragraphs) please also refer to the Template Defence sticky thread for how/where to email this, and what to expect next.

DO NOT try to put the defence in via MCOL.

Thanks I have, its now a total of 38 paragraphs, is there any point of me submitting the extra ones or should i just remove them

Coupon-mad

Why are you looking to remove paragraphs from the bespoke example for DCBLegal claims that you were clearly specially advised to use?

zubz91

Coupon-mad said:

Why are you looking to remove paragraphs from the bespoke example for DCBLegal claims that you were clearly specially advised to use?

I meant the extra paragraphs that i have added in #1 pg 2. I have now submitted it and received the acknowledgement 
AUTO RESPONSE DO NOT REPLY - CCBC AQ Acknowledgment

zubz91

Coupon-mad said:

Why are you looking to remove paragraphs from the bespoke example for DCBLegal claims that you were clearly specially advised to use?

I have not yet recieved the N180 and its been 28 days since I submitted by defence. Do I need to be worried or do anything please advise.

Thank you

KeithP

zubz91 said:
I have not yet recieved the N180 and its been 28 days since I submitted by defence. Do I need to be worried or do anything please advise.

You do not need to be worried.

The CCBC sent you a letter, or will send you a letter, saying the Claimant has twenty eight days to consider your Defence.

What you don't know is when the CCBC sent a copy of your Defence to the Claimant. It follows from that that it is not known when the Claimant has to respond to the CCBC.

Further, we don't know what delays there are in the CCBC that means they don't send you a Directions Questionnaire as promptly as you might like.

And this recent thread indicates that longer delays are likely... CCBC are currently 26 days behind with DQs

Can I suggest that you keep checking your MCOL Claim History and as soon as you see that the CCBC has sent a DQ to you, you are ready to download a DQ, complete it and fire it back at the CCBC, remembering to send a copy to the Claimant of course?

zubz91

KeithP said:

zubz91 said:
I have not yet recieved the N180 and its been 28 days since I submitted by defence. Do I need to be worried or do anything please advise.

You do not need to be worried.

The CCBC sent you a letter, or will send you a letter, saying the Claimant has twenty eight days to consider your Defence.

What you don't know is when the CCBC sent a copy of your Defence to the Claimant. It follows from that that it is not known when the Claimant has to respond to the CCBC.

Further, we don't know what delays there are in the CCBC that means they don't send you a Directions Questionnaire as promptly as you might like.

And this recent thread indicates that longer delays are likely... CCBC are currently 26 days behind with DQs

Can I suggest that you keep checking your MCOL Claim History and as soon as you see that the CCBC has sent a DQ to you, you are ready to download a DQ, complete it and fire it back at the CCBC, remembering to send a copy to the Claimant of course?

Thank you, just to confirm I have received a letter from DCBL in regards to this claim, not exactly sure what I have to do with this? I have also checked MCOL and there is not update

[Image removed by Forum Team]

The letter is below

[Image removed by Forum Team]

Coupon-mad

That's in the Template Defence thread.