BW Legal - around 10 PCNs - what to do next?

Coupon-mad

OK so Henderson v Henderson gives you wording to add. Written already in several defences.

Grande228

I am about to fill my defence, and these are the wordings, should i add anything else ?
In addition, that court claim is issued for several PCNs, should i include all dates?
BW Legal did not reply on my SAR request so i dont have exact dates, so i cant tailor the paragraph to all of them
Additionally, can signature be e-signed and copied into doc, and then sent as PDF?

IN THE COUNTY COURT

Claim No.:  XXXXXX

Between

Napier Parking Ltd

(Claimant) 

- and -  

XYZ (Defendant)

_________________

DEFENCE

1.  The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.  It is denied that any conduct by the driver was in breach of any term.  Further, it is denied that this Claimant (understood to have a bare license as agents) has standing to sue or form contracts in their own name. Liability is denied, whether or not the Claimant is claiming 'keeper liability', which is unclear from the boilerplate text in the Particulars of Claim ('the POC').

The facts known to the Defendant:

2. The facts in this defense come from the Defendant's own knowledge and honest belief.  Conversely, the Claimant sets out a cut-and-paste incoherent and sparse statement of case.  The POC is devoid of any detail and even lacks specific breach allegation(s), making it very difficult to respond. However, it is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle.

3.It is acknowledged that on [date], the Defendant's vehicle was highly likely to have been parked at [location], as this was the residence of the defendant's partner, where they held de facto authorization to park a roadworthy vehicle. Furthermore, on DATE, it is similarly acknowledged that the Defendant's vehicle was very likely parked at LOCATION, as this also served as the residence of the defendant's partner, and due to the housing crisis in London, was a temporary abode where they were de facto authorized to park a roadworthy vehicle. Notably, the issued parking tickets were linked to the Defendant's previous addresses, which they vacated in November 2021, subsequently residing at Uncinia House, Colindale until June 2022. Additionally, it remained unclear whether the charges applied to motorcycles.

Coupon-mad

Why did you change the spelling of the word defence in paragraph 2 to a non-existent word in the UK (defense is a horrible Americanism!).  Do you wrongly have a US version of spellcheck on?

Your defence is good but could go further. There is a good example of residential defence words by @Rinches19 already linked in the NEWBIES thread second post. Did you miss it?

Remove the first phrase that says: "where they held de facto authorization to park a roadworthy vehicle" as it is repeated better later in the same paragraph...

But it again has a non-existent American word:

"authorization"

Nope.  Please turn off that US spellcheck as these horrible Americanisms will seriously annoy a traditional old Judge even more than it annoys us!

KeithP

You've used the word 'vehicle' five times in those proposed paragraphs of your Defence and the last word of your paragraph 3 reminds us - but tells the Judge for the first time - that these incidents involved a motorcycle.
The parking of a motorcycle is likely to cause much less of an obstruction than a four wheeled vehicle.
I would suggest that you introduce earlier the idea that it is motorcycle involved - maybe even replacing the word 'vehicle' every time.

Grande228

Thank you very much for your tips, i have corrected the defense that will be sent out tomorrow
i have also implemented other wording, is that better or something has to be removed?

Also i remember that at one occasion i have been issued 2 PCNs during same stay one in the evening and another one in the morning, im not sure if the whole case is regarding those pcns as i have paid CCJ last year, but not sure what exactly that was for. Can i use this as an argument of predatory behaviour ? 

EDIT:
also forgot to mention that when i was living with my ex-partner it was not "legal", as in i lived in the shared room where i paid her but it was not on contract, therefore i dont have any papers to "validate" my tenancy there. Can it be an issue in court?






Also i have another version, including Henderson v Henderson

Coupon-mad

Staying with your partner to form a family 'bubble' during lockdown was encouraged.  You were a genuine visitor and temporary resident.  No worries there.

This isn't grammatical:

"as well as development works going place"

Do you mean some of the parking area for residents or visitors was covered/removed due to building work or barriers?  If so, where you list Jopson and Plustrade, add a third authority:  Kettel v Bloomfold (Google and read the summary about it, it is about the duty on a Managing Agent to provide the same parking facility in an alternative area, in cases where bays are taken up by building works). 

NEW THIS WEEKEND:

In the section about woeful POC, almost all Defendants should now add mention of this judgment with a few words explaining it:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6473149/major-judgement-where-judge-strike-out-the-claim-form/p1

Grande228

Coupon-mad said:

Staying with your partner to form a family 'bubble' during lockdown was encouraged.  You were a genuine visitor and temporary resident.  No worries there.

This isn't grammatical:

"as well as development works going place"

Do you mean some of the parking area for residents or visitors was covered/removed due to building work or barriers?  If so, where you list Jopson and Plustrade, add a third authority:  Kettel v Bloomfold (Google and read the summary about it, it is about the duty on a Managing Agent to provide the same parking facility in an alternative area, in cases where bays are taken up by building works). 

NEW THIS WEEKEND:

In the section about woeful POC, almost all Defendants should now add mention of this judgment with a few words explaining it:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6473149/major-judgement-where-judge-strike-out-the-claim-form/p1

with development works i wanted to highlight that the whole area was one big mess with signs all over the place creating confusion wheere u can actually park, there was loads of LOADING signs but have no pics unfortunately

Coupon-mad

Anything on Google Streetview from that time? You can change the date of image back (not on a phone). 

Grande228

Yepp there is something, will that be good? 

Coupon-mad

Did you put the bike in a loading area?

You can say the signs changed over the year due to building works but none of them offered any consideration or clarity as to where a motorbike could or could not stop.

No photos are used at this stage but they may be useful evidence later on.

Have you already shown us the Particulars of Claim? Please do.