Major judgement where judge strike out the claim form

Brightlinks

I saw below judgement where judge strike out the claim form.

Can this be useful for current and future claims from the Private parking firms ?

Umkomaas

That should get Yasmin to have to up her game!

B789

That is a very good appeal. However, I am not sure how binding on the court it may be. It is certainly worth referring to in the vast majority of these woefully inadequate PoCs that we see regularly.

Also very satisfying to see CEL get spanked in court.

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

Umkomaas

B789 said:

That is a very good appeal. However, I am not sure how binding on the court it may be. It is certainly worth referring to in the vast majority of these woefully inadequate PoCs that we see regularly.

Also very satisfying to see CEL get spanked in court.

Persuasive rather than binding, but should be a standard inclusion in any defence of PoC-lazy DCB Legal claim. 

B789

"Persuasive"... that was the word I was looking for. Thank you.

B789

This was the killer bit that downed CEL and, hopefully, all the other scammers, especially DCB Legal:

"It is incumbent upon the claimant to set out how it is that the entitlement to the charge arises."

"The breach itself, however, is not set out. The conduct giving rise to the breach is not set out."

"The conduct amounting to the breach was not set out; it was open to the respondent either to attach a separate particulars of claim or set out a little less of the detail as to the interests calculations and perhaps in that way set out how it was argued that there had been a breach amounting to conduct in breach of a contract."

B789

One bit of confusion... who is Ms Goodchild that is referred to in paragraph #8? I thought Ms Caurus was representing the respondent.

Brightlinks

B789 said:

One bit of confusion... who is Ms Goodchild that is referred to in paragraph #8? I thought Ms Caurus was representing the respondent.

Not very sure I have copied from facebook page appealyourticket

B789

I have the transcript and para #8 states:

8. On behalf of the respondent it was submitted that the claim form states that this is a private car park. It is stated that the defendant was in breach of the terms and conditions: the registration number is given; the location of the car park is given; the times in and out are given as well. Ms Goodchild submitted that the information given was sufficient to comply with the Practice Direction. She referred to pre-action correspondence but accepted that it was not part of the particulars of claim and did not assist in showing whether there had been compliance.

Coupon-mad

She was probably the original rep at the first hearing, who wrongly persuaded the first Judge NOT to allow this person's CCJ set aside application.

OR she works for CEL and signed their Respondent's Notice submission.

Bet CEL wish they'd consented to it now!

Take a bow, Jackson Yamba (ex-BW Legal) who is happy to share his interesting past that brought him into the game of fighting private parking charges:
https://www.contestorlegal.co.uk/blog-3/blog-post-title-one-p6zmk

Re the Template Defence:

And re Witness statement exhibits:

And re CCJ set aside applications:

And re 'CCJ set aside' Skeleton arguments:

The regulars here might recall that a previous iteration of the Template Defence used to include a PDF attachment about strike-outs due to abuse of process (until that was stopped by a deluded HHJ who swallowed some guff on appeal).

Well...I was already planning on attaching the 3 Manchester and Luton strike out Orders to the Template Defence which I was planning on editing next week...

Now I will be attaching this as well. It is on Appeal so it is persuasive.  I will sort it out next week as one PDF.

Except for well-pleaded claims (and I say QDR claims are exempt from this and possibly ParkingEye claims when they file them themselves and set out the breach) we should be telling EVERYONE at the above 4 bolded stages to send this judgment to their Judge.

Calling @hallie28 - send it to your Judge with a short email on Monday with a very short SUPPLEMENTARY SKELETON stating that this persuasive appeal judgment has only just fallen into the public domain but is persuasive in support of the N244 application in hand.

Grizebeck

Jackson Yamba can do what he does as he's actually a solicitors agent for a regulated law firm