Claim Form - Gladstones on behalf of National Parking Management

awlyy89

Coupon-mad said:

Yep looks fine.  Nothing you want to add now you've seen the POC? E.g. Did they include a full copy of the NTK? Is it POFA worded?

I've just realised that the NTK was sent a whole month after the alleged parking event occurred; is this not outside of the 14-day maximum as stated on POFA?

1505grandad

A suggestion  -  would it be ok to replace the paras after the heading "Exaggerated Claim and 'market failure' currently being addressed by UK Government"  -  which is from para 10 in OP's existing Defence  -  with the new paras in the latest D template?.
The OP's existing D includes refs to "The Judgments of HHJ Parkes in Britannia v Semark-Jullien," etc.

EDIT:  on second thoughts it would involve a whole lot of red striking through so perhaps not worth it?

Coupon-mad

Yes I wondered the same and decided it wasn't worth changing.

awlyy89

Coupon-mad said:

Yes I wondered the same and decided it wasn't worth changing.

Anything you can see from the images of the POC I uploaded worth mentioning in the defence? Also is there any case for them sending NTK a month later?

Coupon-mad

The NTK suggests there was a windscreen PCN first (POFA para 8 applies if so, not the 14 days in para 9).

Did they also append proof of this windscreen PCN?

awlyy89

Coupon-mad said:

The NTK suggests there was a windscreen PCN first (POFA para 8 applies if so, not the 14 days in para 9).

Did they also append proof of this windscreen PCN?

Yes, one of the documents has pictures of the car with the PCN - not that I saw this when I collected the car from the garage.

Coupon-mad

So the NTK was served at the right time for POFA.

But you could add to defence that the C has not evidenced a copy of a windscreen PCN (a photo of a yellow packet is not evidence) and thus the C is put to strict proof that they fully complied with the POFA Schedule 4, given the fact that the person who moved the car to the place was not the D. 

awlyy89

Coupon-mad said:

So the NTK was served at the right time for POFA.

But you could add to defence that the C has not evidenced a copy of a windscreen PCN (a photo of a yellow packet is not evidence) and thus the C is put to strict proof that they fully complied with the POFA Schedule 4, given the fact that the person who moved the car to the place was not the D. 

Apologies, I misunderstood, they did attach a reprint of the PCN as one of the documents.

awlyy89

Strange, I was told on the phone that they’re waiting for my amended defence, but the letter says the following. One would assume it wasn’t mandatory.

In any case, given the amount of time that has passed and the lack of changes made, is there a need to amend the defence?

Coupon-mad

No but you don't want this hanging over you for ever and you don't want a judge reviewing that order and deciding (wrongly) that you are in breach.  So either email and say you were not obliged by the Order to do anything and you don't want to amend your defence, or say you were not obliged to do so by the order but as the case has stalled you are hereby filing and serving an amended defence.