UKPC Set Aside Hearing

Chesterfield1970

@Coupon-mad sorry one last question, should i drop all of the exhibits on the bottom of the witness statement so i'm sending one overall document and not separate attachments?

Coupon-mad

Ideally yes, merge all the evidence PDFs.

And append a costs assessment page separately.  Loads of examples including one posted today.  You want your £275 back and costs as the WS says!

I've removed the 6 years Limitation Period stuff.

Chesterfield1970

Ive amended paragraphs 6.2 to just reflect the following is this ok?

6.2.  Further and in the alternative, this claim should be dismissed in recognition that the parking event is now nearly 5 years old. The Claimants had ample time and opportunity to properly serve their claim. Instead, they/their agents dispensed with any address tracing and used a very old address.  This questionable conduct is all down to the Claimant.

6.2.1. There are several authorities for this, including Piepenbrock v Associated News Limited [2020] EWHC 1708 (QB) 4 where the High Court refused the Claimant’s application for a retrospective extension of time to serve a Claim Form after the Claimant failed to demonstrate they took all reasonable steps to serve the Claim form in the period of its validity.

Coupon-mad

I've already done it.

Chesterfield1970

Ah sorry I didnt realise I needed to leave all of this in there

6.2. The Claimants had ample time and opportunity to comply with the Pre-Action Protocol, CPRs and BPA CoP, and properly serve their claim. Instead they waited 4 years and added massively enhanced interest too, I think). In their haste or negligence, they/their agents dispensed with any address tracing and used a very old address.  This questionable conduct is all down to the Claimant.  As such, the claim was not served within 4 months.

6.2.1. There are several authorities for this, including Piepenbrock v Associated News Limited [2020] EWHC 1708 (QB) 4 where the High Court dismissed the Claim after the Claimant failed to demonstrate they took all reasonable steps to serve the Claim form properly.

6.2.2. Mr Justice Nicklin held:

“Ultimately, the problem was that the Claimant had made no attempt to serve in accordance with the rules…Although I sympathise with the Claimant that the consequences for him of the error of not validly serving the Claim Form will be serious, there is nothing that really separates his case from many others who have made similar mistakes when attempting to serve a Claim Form…

I am afraid, in this case, the responsibility for the failure validly to serve the Claim Form rests solely with the Claimant’s side… In light of my conclusions above, having refused the applications made under CPR 7.6, 6.15 and 6.16, there is not a residual self-standing power available under CPR 3.9 to relieve the claimant of the “sanction” that, as a result of his failure to validly to serve the Claim Form during its period of validity, it has now lapsed... Finally, the Claimant seeks an order under CPR 3.10 remedying his error in not validly serving the Claim Form. The Defendants submit that CPR 3.10 cannot rescue the Claimant. This general provision does not enable the Court to do what CPR 7.6(3) forbids: Vinos -v- Marks & Spencer plc [2001] 3 All ER 784; [2001] CP Rep 12 [20].”

Chesterfield1970

Is this ok?

Claim No.: 

Between

UK PARKING CONTROL LIMITED

(Claimant) 

- and -  

 (Defendant)

_________________

Ordinary Costs, as stated in Civil Procedure Rule 27.14.2(e)

Court fee for N244 application for set-aside: £275.00

Fixed Hearing Attendance £95

£ 370.00 TOTAL COSTS CLAIMED

 

Coupon-mad

Maybe these two authorities are better, if you have time to remove Piepenbrock & replace it with:

6.2.1. There are several authorities for the contention that an improperly served claim is 'dead' after 4 months has passed and an erring Claimant's remedy is instead to serve afresh. Authorities include the judgment in Boxwood vs Gleeson [2021] EWHC 947 (TCC)1, which is a reminder of the strictness of the requirements of CPR 7.6 and how difficult it is to use other parts of the Civil Procedure Rules to rectify a failure to serve the claim form within the requisite period: “A claimant is not entitled to rely on the wide, general powers under CPR 3.10 or CPR 3.9 to circumvent the specific conditions set out in CPR 7.6(3) for extending the period for service of a claim form.”

6.2.2.  In Vinos v Marks & Spencer plc [2001] 3 All ER 784 2 the Court of Appeal considered whether an extension of time should be granted under CPR 7.6 in circumstances where the claim form had not been served within 4 months as required by CPR 7.5 and the application was made after expiry of that period. The court refused to grant relief on the basis that it did not have power to do so.

Chesterfield1970

@Coupon-mad Ive amended as per the above, thanks

Coupon-mad

Yes that's fine as a Costs assessment page.

It isn't an exhibit. Just a separate attachment.

What's this bit talking about?

"I refer to 1.3.1 of the first Witness Statement and the evidence submitted xxx.??"

Chesterfield1970

Ive removed it