Kicking the hornets nest

Saverule

I've double checked my WS and I definitely didn't refer to CRA 2013. 

I've put in supplementary statement the following: 
The Defendant wishes to direct attention to paragraph 4 xv. of JL' s supplementary statement, wherein it is indicated that "The Defendant asserts their belief in having been entitled to cancellation rights as per the consumer contracts (information, cancellation, and additional charges) Regulations 2013 ('the regulations')." Per CPR Direction 32.14, I kindly ask the Claimant to precisely identify the location within A's Defense Witness Statement where the Defendant alluded to this specific aspect of the Consumer Contract 2013 regulations. This clarification is sought to prevent any possible misinterpretation by the Court.

Does this sound too brattish? 

Coupon-mad

@Johnersh will like this 2023 case I just found:

https://www.civillitigationbrief.com/2023/02/17/the-court-witness-statements-are-the-careful-work-of-a-legal-team-judge-critical-of-the-way-statements-were-prepared-for-trial/

Why not say something like this (assuming you are certain that these Regs were NOT in your defence NOR in your pleaded Counterclaim, either?):

(i). Neither the Defence, my Counterclaim nor my Witness Statement mentions these Regulations at all.  It is clear from the foregoing that this Claimant's prolix and discursive statement is in fact a generic document to try to 'have the last word' with legal argument, not facts.  Contrary to the relevant Practice Direction, it has not been adapted to the particular facts of this case and it is plainly untrue.

(ii). It seems to me as a litigant-in-person that the Claimants are attempting to mislead the Court with their false statements and that their supplementary statement - a template which bears all the hallmarks of having in fact been created by a parking 'roboclaim' solicitor - should be struck out.

(iii). The judgment of Mr Justice Fancourt in Mackenzie v Rosenblatt Solicitors & Anor [2023] EWHC 331 (Ch) is relevant in terms of the High Court's criticisms of the witness statements prepared in the action, where the learned Judge found that "the four witness statements are of a uniform style and tone, giving the impression of a person with a clear overview of events, if not their detail, and a clear picture of the case to be advanced".

He continued as follows:

"146.  The four witness statements are the careful work of a legal team, contrary to the requirements of Practice Direction 57AC that a statement should be so far as possible in the witness’s own words. Each statement works by making assertions about what happened, at a level of generality or summary, rather than setting out the facts as recalled in detail, and resembles a position statement seeking to advance a case more than a witness statement. The summary of what happened is often an exaggeration of what is shown by the documents or just inaccurate.”

Saverule

@Coupon-mad - You're a superstar. This is EXACTLY what is going on, they are not recalling events, they're trying to rebut my points one by one before 'trial.' None of what they've said pertains to the day, and in this instance they do not state where they are looking only that the defendant suggests CRA 2013 specifically (information, cancellation and additional fees)... etc. 

on every point, I've stated the document, the page, the para, the exhibit or excerpt. On some of these points, I swear they're intentionally shooting themselves in the foot. 

"The defendant is aware we have disabled bays because they parked in one." ITS A GOOD THING I'M DISABLED THEN... *facepalm* 

Also reminds me they said I was a he and I didn't get in touch with them at all before legal proceedings, I should quote that as well, show they're a repeat offender!!!! 

Coupon-mad

Yes, do that.

Saverule

@Coupon-mad - This feels like a grenade is about to go off, I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not! lol 

Saverule

I'm all done, I refuse to write any more WS's!!!! 

Le_Kirk

Saverule said:

I'm all done, I refuse to write any more WS's!!!! 

Good, because Judges hate WS ping-pong!

Umkomaas

Those are heavy legal procedural questions which might well be beyond the pay grade of a simple private parking forum. You might not get the full-volume response you might be seeking. 

Saverule

@Umkomaas - Thanks, wasn't expecting much tbh, I find it helpful to air my ideas and spring board arguments/counter myself.  I've had a browse 57A doesn't apply in County Court. I'm going to double check the Witness Statement CPR as I'm sure there's something under CPR 32, Para 18. 

Saverule

3 days from court and I‘ve just received yet ANOTHER witness statement. *facepalm.* 

My crib sheet is getting longer and longer.