Gladstones/UKCPM Defence

Pshtiger2025

Right makes sense, is there a way to have a hyperlink to where ever it says '12 steps' for example? when i looked at the newbies sticky, it mentions the first 12 steps are set out out in the template defence, but then doesnt really say where the template defence is. So it may also be good to hyperlink the words 'template defence' just a though that might help others.  Thanks

Coupon-mad

But the Template Defence thread is another Announcement thread at the top of the forum and it's also linked in the NEWBIES thread.

Rinches19

Good afternoon all

If I understand this correctly it doesn't appear that the Judge(a different Judge from the previous hearing)was minded to strike this out, and we must now proceed to the witness statement stage...

Coupon-mad

You've already supplied, I think:

- a defence which mentions Kettel v Bloomfold and Jopson v Homeguard and which provided links to those transcripts?

- a WS with exhibits including bay images, newspaper articles and sections of your lease rights?

- a skeleton argument about why the claim should be struck out for 2 reasons: (1) the POC was expired unserved after 4 months and the court has no power to resurrect an expired claim (authority: VCS v Carr at the Court of appeal), and (2) the unserved POC failed to comply with Part 16 (authorities: Chan and Akande).

If the answer is yes (all of that was already filed & served earlier?) the only things to add to your bundle are, I think:

- the VCS v Carr written judgment that came out from the CoA two days ago (see the thread by @ChirpyChicken ) which confirmed that DJ Iyer's judgment was correct and a claim is expired after 4 months if no POC were served, and  

- the Duchess of Bedford House landmark case which was ratified by the Supreme Court (they refused an appeal application). The Court of Appeal confirmed the fundamental principle: whilst parking operators can introduce a scheme where it is in the interests of residents to supply a VRM for a whitelist or display a permit, those operational conveniences cannot supersede residential rights under leases or habitual practice:

https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewca/civ/2023/1470?query=Duchess+Bedford

Rinches19

Thanks @Coupon-mad

I didn't get to the WS stage previously.

From memory, after a call(or 2)to Bath County Court I was told the claimant wasn't going to continue if I hadn't heard anything within a couple weeks after filling the defence. I guess this was due to the oversight...

I will start my WS this evening.

Is it worth supplying everything again as a complete bundle(when I dig it all out..), or just the missing WS and new case law?

It's a different Judge, 2 years later and I'm unsure how it works behind the scenes at Bath CC.

Coupon-mad

Early on in your thread, our advice was to supply a defence, a WS and exhibits, plus a skeleton argument. I thought you'd done those so I'm confused now!

Please show us EXACTLY which submissions were filed and served, so far. No need to show the first WS that went with your N244, if that was only about addresses and the CCJ.

Rinches19

Sure @Coupon-mad

So far, for this hearing(not the set aside)I've supplied my Defence to Bath CC(and Gladstone)at the beginning of August 2023, and a few weeks ago an N180 with a Skeleton Argument attached as instructed. 

Coupon-mad

OK, so it's the WS & exhibits that you need to do then. These are covered in the Newbies thread.

Rinches19

Thanks @Coupon-mad - working on it now.

Rinches19

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1SMFNDiKX0cdWeDNGxgarYKY4R_qcU0_o/view?usp=drivesdk