Very Old Parking Ticket

B789

3. The Defendant used the BP garage to purchase a sandwich. When they returned to the vehicle it would not start. The Defendant had to wait for several hours for a friend to arrive and help to jump start the vehicle. This was also explained to the company that issued the original parking fine invoice, but this was ignored, and they continued to pursue the Defendant for this alleged parking offence event.

jme85

Done and sent! Just in time. Thanks to all of you amazing people for all of your help.

jme85

Just had this struck out! WIN!!! Thanks again to everyone for all your help

Castle

jme85 said:

Just had this struck out! WIN!!! Thanks again to everyone for all your help

Did the court give a reason?

jme85

Upon considering the file and Directions Questionnaires for purposes of Allocation and directions

And upon noting that:

a. The Particulars of Claim are entirely inadequate, in that they fail to particularise (i) the contractual
term(s) relied upon; (ii) the specifics of any alleged breach of contract; or (iii) the alleged loss

b. On the basis of the Particulars within the Claim Form, neither the Court nor the Defendant are able to
understand, properly and specifically, what case is being pursued

c. The Particulars appear to be in breach of CPR 16.4, 16PD3 and 16PD7, and fail to state all facts
necessary for the purpose of formulating a complete cause of action'"

d. In the event that it was or is impossible to properly set out the key parts of the claim within the character

limi ee

then it was incumbent upon the Claimant to file and serve separate Particulars of Claim within 14
days per 16PD.3

And upon no further particulars havíng been filed

And upon it having been entirely within the Claimant's Solicitors' gift to properly plead the claim at the
outset

And upon the claim being for a very modest sum, well within the small clainms limit, such that the Court
considers it disproportionate, and contrary to the overriding objective (in the context of a failure by the
Claimant to properly comply with rules and practice directions), to order further particulars, to which a
further defence might be filed, followed by further referral to a Judge for directions and allocation

nopcns

Well done. It just goes to show how "judge bingo" plays out. In another claim, earlier today, the judge threw the Claimant a lifeline by striking out the PoC but ordering them to re-serve the PoC and and clarify whether they are relying on PoFA to hold the defendant (keeper) liable.

Which judge and which court was this?

Umkomaas

Nice one @jme85 and thank you for feeding back your win. 

Which court threw this out please?

jme85

Southend county court

Coupon-mad

jme85 said:

Southend county court

Yay - congrats

ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST!

Please could you show us a photo of that judgment?  Cover your name on it. Just like these ones (look under the Chan one...read them all).  We want to add yours!

Judgments