Defence help please ***updated*** now at WS stage

writeaboutnow

Hello,

Have been following this brilliant Forum for some time now, have read many a useful thread and taken copious notes along the way, which have really helped me through to the stage of writing my Defence. The deadline for submitting this is a week today - 26th June - but I am keen to get it done and submitted by this coming Friday (as I understand that weekends are best avoided regarding emailing CCBC and don't want the stress of waiting to send it on the final day).

I have used the the suggested combination of the defence produced by Johny86 (thank you), removing paragraph 4 as I admit being the driver, with the rest of the defence template provided in the Newbies thread. I still need to insert my personal defence points, but am not quite sure how to defend my overstay.

I am also trying to ensure that the points referred to in the resulting document is relevant to my case, but am struggling to understand some of the details, as follows:

- How do I know if the Particulars of Claim on my claim form are "in breach"/defective? The PoC has exactly the same wording as Cokiedoughmama which they posted on  24/11/2022: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6404973/ukpc-dcbl-county-court-claim-nottingham/p4 (except UKPC/DCBL are claiming £170, not £160, as being the total of the PCN and damages). I'm unsure if I can therefore use paragraph 1 because of the final sentence "Liability is denied, whether or not the Claimant is claiming 'keeper liability' which is unclear from the Particulars" - as the PoC states "D is liable as the driver or keeper".

- The PoC is also mentioned in para 5 (my paragraph 4) as appearing to be in breach of CPR 16.4, 16PD3 and 16PD7 for failing to state all facts necessary for the purpose of formulating a complete cause of action" - again, I'm not sure I can use this? Is the Practice Direction part of the Civil Procedure Rules?

I may be getting bogged-down with details, but it's important to me that I try and get my head round as much of the nitty-gritty as I possibly can, as I feel I need to make sense of the above before I can get on with writing my own part.

Thanks for reading and I look forward to your comments. 

KeithP

Looks like you might have a County Court Claim Form.

If so, what is the Issue Date on it?

If you have filed an Acknowledgment of Service, upon what date did you do that?
Your MCOL Claim History will have the definitive answer to that question.

Coupon-mad

You can use ALL of the above except you are right to remove Johny's para 4.

Use 3 and 4 to state the facts about why you consider you were authorised to be there, what sort of car park it is and how minuscule the text is about £100 on the signs.

If that doesn't take up two paragraphs add this one about miscalculated excessive interest, assuming UKPC have sat on this case for years
(thanks to @Johnersh for the case law and some of this wording):


4.  As well as denying that the Claimant is entitled to parking charges, the Defendant denies that the Claimant has incurred any ‘damages’ or ‘debt recovery fees’ at all.  Then there is the extortionate attempt to harvest several years’ interest, which must surely be dismissed by the court. Interest is discretionary, not an absolute entitlement and it has been falsely calculated from day one on the whole amount.

4.1.  The Defendant takes the point that enhancing their claim to interest on either impermissible sums or on an incorrect basis, is reason enough to disallow the claim.

4.2.   Further, this Claimant has sat on their hands and unreasonably delayed commencing proceedings for years, setting themselves up to profit from a hugely exaggerated 'reward' by default, had the claim not been defended in time. As such, the Defendant also takes the point that – in the unlikely event that this claim is successful – interest should be disallowed or significantly reduced (per Claymore Services Ltd v Nautilus Properties Ltd [2007] BLR 452). 

writeaboutnow

I do indeed, the Issue Date is 24th May 2023 and I filed the Acknowledgement of Service on 6th June, with an immediate confirmation received from MCOL.

Thanks for checking-up on that KeithP

writeaboutnow

Thanks @Coupon-mad for clarification on using those paragraphs, appreciated.

The incident took place in 2021 so the interest probably wouldn't be deemed as 'excessive'... hopefully I can try and use/tweak those suggested points by @Johnersh though, thank you,

KeithP

writeaboutnow said:

I do indeed, the Issue Date is 24th May 2023 and I filed the Acknowledgement of Service on 6th June, with an immediate confirmation received from MCOL.

Thanks for checking-up on that KeithP

You are right with your Defence filing deadline but there might be something useful here...

With a Claim Issue Date of 24th May, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 26th June 2023 to file your Defence.

That's just one week 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'.

Coupon-mad

Yes it is excessive and wrongly calculated!

writeaboutnow

Right, thank you @Coupon-mad ... I will certainly use those paragraphs. 

Can I also check if the fact that my original ticket was issued not actually showing the charge on it (the reduced charge is barely legible) is relevant to include as part of my defence points? The SAR copies I requested to be sent were very clear though...

Coupon-mad

No I wouldn't bother

writeaboutnow

Thanks for your guidance so far, I feel encouragingly inspired to get on with my outstanding paragraphs now!

writeaboutnow

I've put this together so far, but I'm thinking it's way too wordy and doubtless needs a tweak... 

3. The Defendant parked in St Stephen’s Place Leisure Park in Trowbridge on the date specified and obtained a free “Pay and Display” ticket from the car park machine, which was clearly displayed in their vehicle. The Defendant was a consumer of both a restaurant and a coffee shop at the Leisure Park throughout their visit. 

4. The Defendant does not agree that the expiry date and time details displayed on the P&D tickets offer any clarity whatsoever, to benefit the patrons of this particular car park. On the previous occasions that the Defendant has used it for leisure purposes, they have noted that the expiry details on the P&D tickets issued have allowed for an extended free period, well into the following day. The Defendant asserts that they should not be held accountable or financially penalised as a result of misleading P&D ticket information, or furthermore, for the Claimant’s lack of clear, prominent and corresponding signage. 

5. As well as denying that the Claimant is entitled to parking charges, the Defendant denies that the Claimant has incurred any ‘damages’ or ‘debt recovery fees’ at all.  Then there is the extortionate attempt to harvest the additional years of interest, which must surely be dismissed by the court. Interest is discretionary, not an absolute entitlement and it has been falsely calculated from day one on the whole amount. 
 
6.  The Defendant takes the point that enhancing their claim to interest on either impermissible sums or on an incorrect basis, is reason enough to disallow the claim. 
 
7.  The Defendant also takes the point that – in the unlikely event that this claim is successful – interest should be disallowed or significantly reduced (per Claymore Services Ltd v Nautilus Properties Ltd [2007] BLR 452). 

Thanks for any tips