PCN never received

Coupon-mad

Poppy87 said:

I am unsure what to put in my paragraph 3, do i mention lack of NTK

But you aren't doing your facts in para 3. You know that from the link to the hharry defence that's right there in para 3.

Poppy87

Coupon-mad said:

Poppy87 said:

I am unsure what to put in my paragraph 3, do i mention lack of NTK

But you aren't doing your facts in para 3. You know that from the link to the hharry defence that's right there in para 3.

Thanks, yes I have drafted now used Hharys defence, I used Chan as para 2 & 3 i added the extra judgments as persuasion, followed by a brief statement confirming that the car was parked there, then just copied the rest of the defence template 

Coupon-mad

Good.  Wanna show us para 5 to check?

Poppy87

Coupon-mad said:

Good.  Wanna show us para 5 to check?

The facts known to the Defendant: 

7. The facts 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 appears to be in breach of CPR 16.4, 16PD3 and 16PD7, and fail to "state all facts necessary for the purpose of formulating a complete cause of action". The Defendant is unable, on the basis of the POC, to understand with certainty what case, allegation(s) and what heads of cost are being pursued, making it difficult to respond. However, the vehicle is recognised and it is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver. 

8. The Defendant was a patron at the McDonalds restaurant within the retail park, therefore a genuine customer.  

Because i added the extra judgments underneath the chan case, it works out about 8, I have just confirmed that the car was parked there 

Coupon-mad

Should be para 5 if you are using the hharry100 defence linked in the Template Defence para 3?

Poppy87

Coupon-mad said:

Should be para 5 if you are using the hharry100 defence linked in the Template Defence para 3?

I added other similar cases were it had been struck out underneath the chan case 

Coupon-mad

Ah good - makes sense.    

I'd REMOVE the admission of being the driver.  The POC only says "the D is liable as keeper" so that's what you have to answer to.

...add to para 8:

The Defendant has no knowledge of the parking event and no Notice to Keeper was received, so the chance to appeal was not available.  Any breach of whatever unknown term (not specified by this poorly-pleaded claim) is denied.  The Claimant is put to strict proof of all their allegations and they are put to strict proof of being able to rely on 'keeper liability', including (but not limited to) proper service of a compliant Notice to Keeper, adequate notice of the parking charge, the existence of a 'relevant contract/obligation' and evidence of a breach.

Poppy87

Coupon-mad said:

Ah good - makes sense.    

I'd REMOVE the admission of being the driver.  The POC only says "the D is liable as keeper" so that's what you have to answer to.

...add to para 8:

The Defendant has no knowledge of the parking event and no Notice to Keeper was received, so the chance to appeal was not available.  Any breach of whatever unknown term (not specified by this poorly-pleaded claim) is denied.  The Claimant is put to strict proof of all their allegations and they are put to strict proof of being able to rely on 'keeper liability', including (but not limited to) proper service of a compliant Notice to Keeper, adequate notice of the parking charge, the existence of a 'relevant contract/obligation' and evidence of a breach.

Perfect thank you very much

Poppy87

Im sure i saw somewhere regarding font size, spacing etc does it matter? if so what should i use.

Le_Kirk

Poppy87 said:

Im sure i saw somewhere regarding font size, spacing etc does it matter? if so what should i use.

It will be in the NEWBIE sticky but I seem to recall it is Times New Roman, 12, double spaced. It pained me to type that as I hate TNR!