ParkingEye Court Claim from 2019 without previous letters

B789

If you don't want to p!ss the judge off, make sure that you attach any images of the transcript of the HJJ Murch decision in the correct order. Also, that one should be first and foremost in your citations as it is persuasive. The others are just run of the mill judgments.

xavian1234

I did attach the 4 HJJ Murch pages in the right sequence (I believe?) and it is indeed the 1st I present.

Coupon-mad

xavian1234 said:

Would this be valid?

I will then update all the numbers of the following paragraphs in the template.

2. The facts in this defence 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. The driver was his nephew, who was included in the vehicle insurance and living in Cambridge at the time.

 

3. The driver cannot recall why they were at the location on an unremarkable day more than four years ago and so has no knowledge of any signs or restrictions.  The driver is not in the habit of breaching rules and firmly believes that the signage was inadequate, and has no idea which terms they are alleged to have breached.

 

4. The Defendant did not receive initial communication from the Claimant until the present Claim was submitted despite the fact that the Government's new statutory Code (linked later in this defence) requires a fresh Notice to be served at the original rate, and appeal to be made available, in cases where the first Notice was not received.

5. In addition to these facts, a recent persuasive appeal judgment in Civil Enforcement Limited v Chan (Ref. E7GM9W44) would indicate the POC fails to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4 and the Practice direction to Part 16. On the 15th 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. See below.

 

 

6. Similarly, at the Wakefield County Court on 8th September 2023, District Judge Robinson considered mirror image POC in claim K3GF9183 (Parallel Parking v anon) and struck the Claim out without a hearing. See below.

 

 

7.  Likewise, in January 2023 (also without a hearing) District Judge Sprague, sitting at the County Court at Luton, struck out a similarly badly-pleaded parking claim with a full explanation of his reasoning. See below.

 

8. Furthermore, at Manchester District Judge McMurtrie and District Judge Ranson also struck out a claim (again without a hearing) on the grounds of POC’s lacking clarity, detail, and precision. As stated in the final image below, the Claimant’s solicitors confirmed they would not file an amended POC, demonstrating again the reliance of a number of firms on robo-letters and illegitimate practices. See below.

 

 

 

9. 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.

Very nice.

That's the new example we can point people to, as long as they add the rest of the Template below it (and excepting QDR claims which are not so poorly pleaded).

You could add to 8 that these solicitors were DCBLegal (because it was them):

 " As stated in the final image below, the Claimant’s solicitors - DCBLegal - confirmed they would not file an amended POC, "

xavian1234

Thanks. I'll add that small extra to paragraph 8 and get the document ready for submission tomorrow then. My understanding is that I can sign the name in Word and append a photo of the signature (I have no printer + scanner to print and rescan the document) 

B789

You can just type your name. It is accepted as "signed"

1505grandad

" My understanding is that I can sign the name in Word and append a photo of the signature....." 
Just checking  -  that will be the Defendant's name

xavian1234

1505grandad said:

" My understanding is that I can sign the name in Word and append a photo of the signature....." 
Just checking  -  that will be the Defendant's name

Correct, that's what I meant (but thank you for making sure I don't forget )

B789

Practice directions regarding signing a statement of truth say the following:

4A.1

Where

(a) a form referred to in Practice Direction 5A; or

(b) a form completed or generated by electronic means in accordance with Part 41 FPR,

(c) a document other than a form referred to in sub-paragraph (a) or (b), such as a witness statement

makes provision for an electronic signature of a statement of truth, references in this Practice Direction to “sign”, “signs”, “signed” and “signing” are to be read as including an electronic signature. An electronic signature could, for example, be in the form of the following being included next to a statement of truth: a tick box, a printed name, an image of a signature or a digital signature generated by commercial software. (Section 7 of the Electronic Communications Act 2000 provides for the use of an electronic signature in an electronic communication.)

xavian1234

Hi, submitted and acknowledged! 

Thank you for emailing the County Court Business Centre, please accept this as a receipt of your email.

Thank you for the help. Now for the next phase.

xavian1234

And we're back. Just received a small claims letter to answer to.