Group Nexus DCB Legal court claim, at WS stage

Stanley87

Sorry replied on wrong thread

Blackysowner

LDast do you mean the "preliminary matter" line should be removed?
on the other hand I do realised that "ignore the defence and allocating to a hearing" is just another standard procedure for them to try and get money out of us...

Blackysowner

Also, thank you 1505grandad for pointing out that mistake to me! Much appreciated.

Blackysowner

Stanley87 I think you can delete your replies here.

LDast

If you’re using the Chan preliminary matter, you can’t then go and blab the cause of action in your own paragraph. The Preliminary Matter is a sub-heading followed by the 2 paras of the Chan appeal and transcript. Next is the “Facts as known by the defendant” sub header which includes your own para.

So, if you’re going to use the long boilerplate defence, para #1 stays as is. Next Subheading preliminary matter then what you have as paras #3 and #4 become #2 and 3 with the transcript images. Next subheading “facts” followed by your para #2 which becomes para #4 then your own paras then the rest of the template.

The judge is unlikely to read it so this is all a bit academic.

You cannot use your paras as they are as they completely contradict the reason for the Chan argument. Assume you have not received anything about this matter except what was in the PoC on the claim form. Answer/defend anything you can from those inadequate PoC. If you can’t, then say so. Don’t do the claimants job by filling in the gaps where they have broken the rules by not particularising the claim properly.

Blackysowner

Hi, thank you very much for the reply LDast! It is really really appreciated!!!!!

I have followed your suggestions here and did all these:
1. Left para #1 stays as is,
2. Put Subheading "Preliminary matter" and then paras #3 and #4 become #2 and 3 with the transcript images of the Chan's case.
3. Then put Subheading "The facts known" followed by para #2 which now becomes para #4, then my own para


Now about adjusting my own paras,

When you mentioned "completely contradict the reason for the Chan argument".

I thought the Chan's case would help since it is about the POC being inadequate? "the Particulars of claim were entirely inadequate; in that they failed to particularise the contractual term relied upon, the specifics of the alleged breach of contract to allow the  Appellant on the basis of the Particulars within the claim form to understand properly and specifically what case is being pursued." Which is the same in my (and many many others on this forum) case? Am I correct? Or am I talking non-sense here?

Do you mean by specifying what happened to me (what I did and didnt do while parking there, what I did afterwards by trying to contact them, etc.), I am making things clear for the claimant? Which contradicts to the fact that we would like the claim to remain as vague as it is now?

Or did you mean it was completely wrong for me to have included this case here at the first place?


Since para #2 which now becomes para #4, already stated "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."

it seems like I could only come up with one para #5 as my own para, which is:

"5. The Defendant denies the allegations, save that it is admitted that they were the keeper and driver. On the day in question, the Defendant parked the car at Valentine Retail Park LN6 7BH, went into the shops there as a genuine customer. The Defendant then left the Retail Park by the car afterwards."

Now not mentioning I didnt receive a letter until months after (but this was already in the response to LOC), not mentioning what shops I went to, not mentioning how long I stayed, not mentioning how much I spent, just the simple fact that I went there, parked there, went into the shops there, and eventually left by the car.

Since I really dont know what I did wrong. There is nothing else I could write as a defence to "defend myself". Or is there anything else I should add to my para?


I am very sorry for the long winded reply, would really appreciate some answers here.

Again, really really appreciate the help and support I've been receiving here from all of you, thank you very much!

LDast

What is the claimant alleging you did? The allegation is that you breached a contract and that you owe them money. That’s it! 

Perhaps I should conjure up a claim and file it against anyone for some imaginary sum. It isn’t allowed. If you need to understand why, have a study of the Court Procedure Rules and Practice Directions that pertain to what must be particularised in a claim:

CPR Part 16. Statements of Case

Practice Direction Part 16

Take note of this Draft Order that could be used if a short defence was used instead. Have a read of what level of detail the judge expects the claimant to provide in order for the defendant to be able to provide a valid defence:

Draft Order for defence with no cause of action

Most of that is already in the long defence but it is lost because most judges will not bother reading what has become known as a boilerplate “one size fits all” defence. It will simply be allocated to a hearing where, if it ever actually gets there, will need to be argued with a suitable WS which is where all the detail about parking is provided.

From the PoC in your claim, do you know what the “contract” was? Do you know the wording of the contractual term or terms that the defendant breached? Do you know on what date and time the contract was allegedly breached? Do you know the detail of the invoice (PCN) that the claimant is alleging contains the sum of the charge? Do you know the detail of the “damages” and a breakdown of them? Do you know how the interest was calculated and from what date? Do you know whether the unknown date used is the correct date for starting the calculation.

You have to be able to answer those questions from the detail in the PoC. You can’t and the claimant can’t provide it all either. However, as it is simply a defence and not an order, it will likely be skimmed over and you will be hoping that the case will be discontinued or thrown out should you get an allocation judge who is a masochist and does not enjoy the easy life by trawling through the whole defence. Just as we are fed up of having to read the whole defence when someone posts it on here with a “please read and tell me if it’s OK”.

Blackysowner

Hi, thank you for the reply, LDast!

For all the questions above, the answer for most of them is no, except this:
Do you know on what date and time the contract was allegedly breached?- Yes, the date was mentioned before from one of their earlier letters, but not on the letter of claim.


I wrote that part based on this link here: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6108153/suggested-template-defence-to-adapt-for-all-parking-charge-cases-where-they-add-false-admin-costs/p1

It mentions to add our own paragraph:
"Say why the car was there - if you know - but don't answer to details that are not stated in the PARTICULARS OF CLAIM. If you didn't get any letters or it was years ago & you can't recall if you were driving, say that.  ONLY IF TRUE."

and so I did, do you mean that I shouldnt be writing anything in my paragraph in my case?

Coupon-mad

Do you mean by specifying what happened to me (what I did and didnt do while parking there, what I did afterwards by trying to contact them, etc.), I am making things clear for the claimant? Which contradicts to the fact that we would like the claim to remain as vague as it is now?

Yes.

You can either use the (tried & tested) long defence version you have drafted or LDast's new short one with a draft order.  For the record, I'm uncomfortable with the latter (concerns are discussed in several threads).

But then he's uncomfortable with the former!

Blackysowner

so does that mean my paras were ok? I could just take away some points to make it so that it is less "detailed"?