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

Grande228

No not the loading area, the bay opposite of it, thats where i used to park and they fined me
they havent sent me back the SAR request back, completely ignored me and got two court claims

Coupon-mad

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

Grande228

Those are two letters that came and im making defense for, for both of my motorcycles. Im guessing but it might be that 05/08 - 06/08 one is the one ive mentioned, two FCNs issued during one stay (one in the evening, and one in the morning) but without certainity cant state that right?

Coupon-mad

You won't be stating that detail or trying to guess anyway.  They haven't even bothered to state the 3 dates of the 3 FCNs!

Include the Henderson v Henderson wording and judgment/strike out Order x 2 photos and extra wording as seen in the Defence example by @manooo and then add the Luton Appeal Judgment persuasive one that went against CEL.

Le_Kirk

i have corrected the defense

except the spelling of the word defence

Grande228

Coupon-mad said:

You won't be stating that detail or trying to guess anyway.  They haven't even bothered to state the 3 dates of the 3 FCNs!

Include the Henderson v Henderson wording and judgment/strike out Order x 2 photos and extra wording as seen in the Defence example by @manooo and then add the Luton Appeal Judgment persuasive one that went against CEL.

Thank you, will do as you say, how about if i dont know the claim number?

This is the defense that i am about to send today for both claims

B789

As those PoC fail the CPR and PD, you need to cite the very recent Luton appeal case:

1. Recent persuasive Appeal judgment in Civil Enforcement Limited v Chan (Ref. E7GM9W44, attached) would indicate the PoC fails to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4 and the Practice direction to Part 16.  on the 23rd August 2023 in the cited case, HHJ Murch held that 'the particulars of the claim as filed and served did not set out the conduct which amounted to the breach in reliance upon which the claimant would be able to bring a claim for breach of contract'.  The Defendant asserts that this Claim is based upon an agreement by conduct.  The Defendant asserts that the Claimant has failed to specify how Contract terms have been breached by the conduct of the Defendant in the PoC. 

2. The Defendant believes the Claim should be struck out at Allocation stage and should not have been accepted by the CNBC due to a represented parking firm Claimant knowingly breaching basic CPRs.

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/xy54utt9djv55xitfp7lk/CEL-appeal-transcript.pdf?rlkey=304syf9czf5arl3i1u1ircjln&dl=0

Grande228

B789 said:

As those PoC fail the CPR and PD, you need to cite the very recent Luton appeal case:

1. Recent persuasive Appeal judgment in Civil Enforcement Limited v Chan (Ref. E7GM9W44, attached) would indicate the PoC fails to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4 and the Practice direction to Part 16.  on the 23rd August 2023 in the cited case, HHJ Murch held that 'the particulars of the claim as filed and served did not set out the conduct which amounted to the breach in reliance upon which the claimant would be able to bring a claim for breach of contract'.  The Defendant asserts that this Claim is based upon an agreement by conduct.  The Defendant asserts that the Claimant has failed to specify how Contract terms have been breached by the conduct of the Defendant in the PoC. 

2. The Defendant believes the Claim should be struck out at Allocation stage and should not have been accepted by the CNBC due to a represented parking firm Claimant knowingly breaching basic CPRs.

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/xy54utt9djv55xitfp7lk/CEL-appeal-transcript.pdf?rlkey=304syf9czf5arl3i1u1ircjln&dl=0

Thank you, should i place it after 3 or 4 in the defense?

B789

The actual defence will need an adjustment as poor PoC are already stated in para #2. This recent appeal case is persuasive and needs highlighting without repeating any other reference to poorly stated PoC. Hopefully @Coupon-mad will be able to update it soon.

Personally, I would place it as para #4 with it's own bold title "Failure to comply with Civil Procedure Rules and Practice Directions".

It may be worth waiting for someone with a bit more experience in these matters to advise if the above is acceptable.

Coupon-mad

I think copy what @manooo put about the 2 strike-out orders in their defence and add some words to introduce the new persuasive judgment.

Then show us what it looks like!