Hi, I have read the forums and This is my defence. I am nerodiverse so please forgive me if its wron

lost_soul_2023

Thank you

KeithP said:

lost_soul_2023 said:

Have you received a County Court Claim Form?
If so, what is the Issue Date on it?
20th September 2023

Have you filed an Acknowledgment of Service?
If so, upon what date did you do that?
23rd September 2023

With a Claim Issue Date of 20th September, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 23rd October 2023 to file your Defence.

That's two weeks away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence and it is good to see that you are not leaving it to the last minute.

To create a Defence, and then file a Defence by email, look at the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Don't miss the deadline 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'.

Thank you very much. I will make sure

lost_soul_2023

KeithP said:

lost_soul_2023 said:

Have you received a County Court Claim Form?
If so, what is the Issue Date on it?
20th September 2023

Have you filed an Acknowledgment of Service?
If so, upon what date did you do that?
23rd September 2023

With a Claim Issue Date of 20th September, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 23rd October 2023 to file your Defence.

That's two weeks away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence and it is good to see that you are not leaving it to the last minute.

To create a Defence, and then file a Defence by email, look at the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Don't miss the deadline 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'.

I confirm that I have followed all guidance set by yourself

Im stuck on the Particulars of Claim on the draft document
"Say why the car was there - if you know - but don't answer to details that are not stated in the PARTICULARS OF CLAIM."

Would I add in my full defence?

Is it even relevant at this stage? Should I just shorten it and use the 2 facts?

I'm not sure from my defence what section would be needed, appropriate for section 4,

Sorry to ask, but i am trying my hardest to work on this, and you all are the only help I have.

Here's my
Particulars of Claim
Claim for money relating to a Parking Charge
for breach of contract terms/conditions(TCs)
for parking in private car park (CP) managed
by Claimant. Drivers may only park pursuant
to TCs of use displayed in CP and agreed upon
entry/parking. ANPR cameras or manual patrols
monitor vehicles entering/exiting the CP and
TC breaches. Charges of CBP170.00 claimed.
Violation date: 26/08/2022
Payment due date: 24/09/2022
Time in: 20:35 Time out: 21:43
PCN: 
Vehicle reg mark:   Car park:-
Swanley Town Council (New Barn Road)
Total due- GBP170.00
(Paywww.ce-service.co.uk or 01158225020)
The Claimant claims the sum of GBP184.49
ar the unpaid parking charge inc GBP14.49
nterest under S.69 of the CCA 1984
Rate: 8.00% pa from due date to- 19/09/23
Same rate to Judgment or sooner payment
at daily rate of- GBPO.04
Total debt and interest due- GBP184.49


Thank you very much



The total fees on this are
Amount claimed: 184.49
Court fee: 35.00
Legal representative’s costs: 50.00
Total amount 269.49


not sure if that's a lot or not, but that's what is stated so far

lost_soul_2023

Update, I just added my full defence, but I made sure that it followed the format that the draft examples uses in section 3
If It's too much, I guess it's better to be in full than to miss something out.

KeithP

lost_soul_2023 said:

Update, I just added my full defence... 

What does this mean please?
Added it where?

lost_soul_2023

In the template on the forums
the section)
The facts known to the Defendant:
section 3 ( i added my full defence in this section)

Coupon-mad

Just use the recent defence by @Rorythoperr

Change his facts section to yours.  Job done.

Le_Kirk

The defence you have shown us is too long and you should, as advised by others, use the later defences where the POC is sparse, particularly the one suggested by @Coupon-mad, just adding short, sharp, punchy facts about why you were there.  Keep all the rest that you wrote for your witness statement later in the process.

fisherjim

How do they get away with this?

If this is owned by an authority they are prevented by law from using ANPR by The Secretary of State for Transport this was communicated to them in 2014.

ANPR cannot give concessions to Blue Badge holders it catches all.

The Council themselves have even called it a "fine" in their correspondence it cannot be a contractual charge, and a fine.

This is very fishy!! 

UncleThomasCobley

With those PoC, you must add the following as your paras #2 and #3:

Preliminary matter: The claim should be struck out

2. The Defendant draws to the attention of the allocating Judge that there is now a persuasive Appeal judgment to support striking out the claim (in these exact circumstances of typically poorly pleaded private parking claims, and the extant PoC seen here are far worse than the one seen on Appeal).  The Defendant believes that dismissing this meritless claim is the correct course, with the Overriding Objective in mind.  Bulk litigators (legal firms) should know better than to make little or no attempt to comply with the Practice Direction.  By continuing to plead cases with generic auto-fill unspecific wording, private parking firms should not be surprised when courts strike out their claims based in the following persuasive authority.

3. 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 Practice Direction 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 same is true in this case and in view of the Chan judgment, the Court should strike out the claim, using its powers pursuant to CPR 3.4

lost_soul_2023

Thank you everybody for your above help and comments.

I will amend as suggested 2 and 3 and shorten my defence.

Thank you all for your help