Civil national business centre

qazxswedc123

Hi

Apologies if this has been answered already but received this letter from the Civil National Business Centre. Is this a CCJ?

I will do the AOS now but would just like advice on how to move forward and if this is winnable basically.

thanks 

KeithP

Hello and welcome.

No it is not a County Court Judgment - a CCJ - no Judgment has been made.
It is a Claim Form.

With a Claim Issue Date of 11th September, you have until Monday 2nd October to file an Acknowledgment of Service but there is nothing to be gained by delaying it. 

To file an Acknowledgment of Service, follow the guidance in the Dropbox file linked from the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 16th October 2023 to file your Defence.

That's almost four weeks away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence, but please don't leave it to the last minute. 

To create a Defence, and then file a Defence by email, look again at the second post on the NEWBIES thread - immediately following where you found the Acknowledgment of Service guidance.

Don't miss the deadline for filing an Acknowledgment of Service, nor that for filing a Defence.

Do not try and file a Defence via the MoneyClaimOnline website. Once an Acknowledgment of Service has been filed, the MCOL website should be treated as 'read only'.

qazxswedc123

@KeithP
Hi thanks for the reply

so i have just done the AOS

will start writing up my defence

would i be able to also copy it in here before i submit just for a review of it

thanks

B789

Of course it is winnable. Once you have filed your AoS, you will be ready to prepare your defence from the defence template thread. As the PoC are woefully inadequate, there is also a new case that should be cited in the defence because the PoC fail to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4 and the Practice Direction to Part 16.

When you are ready to show us the paragraphs you have edited/added to the template defence, we will critique it as necessary before you send it as a PDF attachment in an email to the court and the claimant's solicitor.

qazxswedc123

@B789
thanks. let me get started on it 

Le_Kirk

qazxswedc123 said:

@KeithP
Hi thanks for the reply
so i have just done the AOS
will start writing up my defence
would i be able to also copy it in here before i submit just for a review of it

Yes, we encourage that so we can critique it and offer advice; just post paragraphs 2 & 3 and any you add here; we don't need to see the whole template.  Of course, you add the rest of the template back before you send your defence by e-mail to the address in the template defence thread.

Coupon-mad

Same answer as this one except you don't need the point about Bransby Wilson, obviously.

You do need the other words I just stated there:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6473607/county-court-claim-parking-no-lighting#latest

And the screenshots. Two minutes ago I told that poster which one to copy from about that point, and you can do the same - but you need the 10.25% defence point as well.

Search the forum!

qazxswedc123

Le_Kirk said:

qazxswedc123 said:

@KeithP
Hi thanks for the reply
so i have just done the AOS
will start writing up my defence
would i be able to also copy it in here before i submit just for a review of it

Yes, we encourage that so we can critique it and offer advice; just post paragraphs 2 & 3 and any you add here; we don't need to see the whole template.  Of course, you add the rest of the template back before you send your defence by e-mail to the address in the template defence thread.

just a quick q. ithey issued a ticket as i was on a double yellow line but i was inside the vehicle. what would i mention as part of my defence? 

thnaka

Le_Kirk

I cannot see on the POC in the claim form that you show upthread because you have redacted a lot of it; does it actually state that the breach is because you were on a yellow line?  Don't do the claimant's job for them.  Depends why you were still inside the vehicle; were you perhaps reading the terms and conditions on the sign or trying to pay by phone?

Coupon-mad

Coupon-mad said:

Same answer as this one except you don't need the point about Bransby Wilson, obviously.

You do need the other words I just stated there:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6473607/county-court-claim-parking-no-lighting#latest

And the screenshots. Two minutes ago I told that poster which one to copy from about that point, and you can do the same - but you need the 10.25% defence point as well.

Search the forum!

Please show us your draft that includes all of the above.

qazxswedc123

Coupon-mad said:

Coupon-mad said:

Same answer as this one except you don't need the point about Bransby Wilson, obviously.

You do need the other words I just stated there:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6473607/county-court-claim-parking-no-lighting#latest

And the screenshots. Two minutes ago I told that poster which one to copy from about that point, and you can do the same - but you need the 10.25% defence point as well.

Search the forum!

Please show us your draft that includes all of the above.

the part about 10.25%, would that be added under point number 3?

thanks for the feedback

The facts known to the Defendant:

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 and driver of the vehicle.

 

3. On the day in question, the Defendant found themselves parked while remaining inside their vehicle. They did so out of concern for safety and the need to ascertain parking conditions in the area. Given the absence of available parking spaces and limited visibility of nearby parking signage, the Defendant opted to briefly stop and assess the situation from within their vehicle. Their primary objective was to ensure that they adhered to parking regulations while avoiding any potential traffic hazards.

Gladstones unfairly applied an interest rate of 10.25%, a seemingly arbitrary figure that exceeds the highest permissible rate in civil claims, which is 8%, subject to the court's discretion. Research reveals that this legal representative, operating as a roboclaim firm affiliated with the IPC trade body, consistently imposes a 10.25% interest rate. Furthermore, they rank among the top five "bulk parking case litigators," as indicated in the government's analysis. Gladstones unquestionably initiate tens of thousands of inflated parking claims annually, all bearing the incorrect and objectionable 10.25% interest rate and the unconscionably inflated £60 or £70 charge per PCN, resulting in substantial augmentations to numerous claims. Given the Ministry of Justice's quarterly statistics indicating that 90% of small claims culminate in default County Court Judgments (CCJs), this practice undeniably constitutes an abuse of the system, seemingly driven by Gladstones' profit motive and unrelated to the Claimant's alleged £100 PCN.