CP Plus Ltd T/A Groupnexus County Court Claim Form Defence

Nijinsky

My brother has received a claim from CP Plus Ltd T/A Groupnexus. He kept ignoring letters thinking they would give up and go away, but he has now received a claim form.

Back in 2019, I was in a very similar position and had lots of help from KeithP, Coupon-mad and others, which I was very grateful for. You helped me put together a successful defence, following bargepole's template.

My brother's charge is for an almost identical situation, he parked in a services carpark with the first 2 hours being free. He got held up and took 2 hours 15 minutes to return to his vehicle.

The only real difference I can see is in this instance, the claim form has been signed by a legal person, so I can't say it has not been correctly filed under The Practice Direction 22. The rest of my defence is nearly identical, but I've obviously tweaked a little detail to suit my brothers situation.

My other query is as my successful defence from bargepole's template was back in 2019, is that template now out of date and has anything changed which needs adjusting currently?

My defence is as follows. Please let me know what you think. As always, I appreciate all your help and advice.

In The County Court
Claim No: XXXXXXX
Between
CP PLUS LTD T/A GROUPNEXUS

-and-

XXXXXXX (Defendant)

____________
DEFENCE
____________

In the matter of court claim, XXXXXXX, I am XXXXXXX, the defendant in this matter and the registered keeper of vehicle XXXXXXX. I can be served at the address on the claim form. I deny I am liable for the entirety of the claim on the following grounds:

1. The Particulars of Claim issued on 12th October 2023 by CP Plus Ltd T/A Groupnexus, state that the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or the driver of the vehicle. These assertions indicate that the Claimant has failed to identify a Cause of Action, and is simply offering a menu of choices. As such, the Claim fails to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4, or with Civil Practice Direction 16, paras. 7.3 to 7.5. Further, the particulars of the claim do not meet the requirements of Practice Direction 16 7.5 as there is nothing which specifies how the terms were breached.

2. Due to the sparseness of the particulars, it is unclear as to what legal basis the claim is brought, whether for breach of contract, contractual liability, or trespass. However, it is denied that the Defendant, or any driver of the vehicle, entered into any contractual agreement with the Claimant, whether express, implied, or by conduct.

3. Further and in the alternative, it is denied that the claimant's signage sets out the terms in a sufficiently clear manner which would be capable of binding any reasonable person reading them. They merely state that vehicles must be parked correctly within their allocated parking bay, giving no definition of the term 'correctly parked', nor indicating which bays are allocated to whom.

4. The terms on the Claimant's signage are also displayed in a font which is too small to be read from a passing vehicle, and are in such positions that anyone attempting to read the tiny font would be unable to do so easily. It is, therefore, denied that the Claimant's signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract.

5. The alleged breach, according to CP Plus Ltd T/A Groupnexus, is in contravention of terms and conditions. The signs in this car park are not at all prominent, clear or legible from all parking spaces. The signs in this car park are small, sporadically placed, out of the line of sight for a driver and not clearly visible. It is therefore possible to park and not be able to see any clear signage which complies with BPA requirements. Given this lack of clarity, no contract can be construed from the Claimant's signage, under the "contra proferentem" principle. CP Plus Ltd T/A Groupnexus are required to show evidence to the contrary.

6. The Claimant is put to strict proof that it has sufficient interest in the land or that there are specific terms in its contract to bring an action on its own behalf. As a third party agent, the Claimant may not pursue any charge, unless specifically authorised by the principal. The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant does not have the authority to issue charges on this land in their own name, and that they have no right to bring any action regarding this claim.

7. The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant has not incurred £70 costs to pursue an alleged £100 debt. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, in Schedule 4, Para 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper, in this case £100.

8. The Claimant has failed to comply with the strict requirements of the Protection Of Freedoms Act 2012, schedule 4 (PoFA 2012). The driver of the vehicle has not been identified. The Defendant admits to being the registered keeper of the vehicle on the material date, but there is no evidence of who was driving. As the Claimant has not identified the driver, it cannot be assumed the keeper/driver are one and the same at the time of the supposed contravention (POFA 2012).

9. In summary, it is the Defendant's position that the claim discloses no cause of action, is without merit, and has no real prospect of success. Accordingly, the Court is invited to strike out the claim of its own initiative, using its case management powers pursuant to CPR 3.4.

I believe the facts contained in this Defence are true.

Name
Signature
Date

Coupon-mad

Yes that's very out of date now.

We have a new Template Defence.

What's the Date of Issue of the claim form and please show us the Particulars of Claim

KeithP

What is the Issue Date on your brother's Claim Form?

Has he filed an Acknowledgment of Service?
If so, upon what date did he do so?
His MCOL Claim History will have the definitive answer to that.

You mention "My defence is as follows". It is important that everything is done in the name of the named Defendant - your brother. I.e. it is your brother's Defence.

Nijinsky

The issue date of the claim form is 10/06/2024.

He has filed the AOS today and requested an extension to 28 days, to give additional time to put together the best defence possible.

The Particulars of Claim are:

1. The Defendent (D) is indebted to the Claimant (C) for a Parking Charge(s) issued to vehicle XXXXXX at Roadchef Magor NP26 3YL.

2. The PCN(s) were issued on 12/10/2023.

3. The defendant is pursued as the driver of the vehicle for breach of the terms on the signs (the contract). Reason: Vehicle Remained On Private Property In Breach Of The Prominently Displayed Terms And Conditions.

4. In the alternative the defendant is pursued as the keeper pursuant to POFA 2012, Schedule 4.

AND THE CLAMANT CLAIMS

1. £170 being the total of the PCN(s) and damages.

2. Interest at a rate of 8% per annum pursuant to s.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 from the date hereof at a daily rate of £.02 until judgment or sooner payment.

3. Costs and court fees.

KeithP

You need to be aware that those Particulars of Claim are totally inadequate.
Particularly this bit...

So it is alleged that the driver 'breached the terms on the signs (the contract)'.

And that allegation is then explained in great depth repeated - 'Reason: Vehicle Remained On Private Property In Breach Of The Prominently Displayed Terms And Conditions'.
[a rhetorical question: why does every word in that last sentence start with a capital letter?]

Nowhere in those Particulars is there any explanation of what the driver is alleged to have done wrong.

This will be an easy win.

With a Claim Issue Date of 10th June, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 15th July 2024 to file your Defence.

That's over three weeks away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence but please don't leave 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'.

Nijinsky

KeithP said:

You need to be aware that those Particulars of Claim are totally inadequate.
Particularly this bit...

So it is alleged that the driver 'breached the terms on the signs (the contract)'.

And that allegation is then explained in great depth repeated - 'Reason: Vehicle Remained On Private Property In Breach Of The Prominently Displayed Terms And Conditions'.
[a rhetorical question: why does every word in that last sentence start with a capital letter?]

Nowhere in those Particulars is there any explanation of what the driver is alleged to have done wrong.

This will be an easy win.

With a Claim Issue Date of 10th June, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 15th July 2024 to file your Defence.

That's over three weeks away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence but please don't leave 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'.

Thanks Keith! I will look at the second post in the Newbies thread and update my brothers defence, I will post the defence soon.

Gr1pr

Only post the first half dozen paragraphs, the rest of the latest alternative template remains unchanged so we dont want to see it, it doesn't need posting on here or checking on here either, but use ALL of the template for the final PDF that will be emailed as an attachment to the CNBC 

Nijinsky

Just gone through the updated template. The amount of time and research that's gone into putting that template together is fantastic, I applaud everyone involved for putting that together and a massive thanks to KeithP for posting it.

Sorry if I come across a bit dull asking this, but am I using the whole template (all 30 points)? I see no reason to not use it all, but I just want to double check to be safe.

I've inputted the paragraphs from Harry's post and put a bit of detail in about why my brother was parked at the location. My brothers current defence now looks like this. I know Gr1pr said to only post the first half dozen paragraphs of my defence, but I just want to double check I should be including all this, as there are a total of 34 points in this defence now. Apologies in advance! (Posted separately in next post because I exceeded the character limited).

Gr1pr

The final draft will have everything but the kitchen sink in it

But

As I mentioned earlier, on here you only post the first half a dozen ISH paragraphs, that ones that were changed by you or your brother , nobody is going to read all of it and then try to spot the difference 

The unchanged ones dont need checking, they are already checked 

Its you or your brother's homework that need checking,  not those by coupon mad 

Nijinsky

I haven't really changed anything apart from point 5, where I inputted detail about why my brother had to park in the services:

5. The Defendant remembers on the day in question, his car overheated and he had to pull into the Roadchef Magor Services.  The Defendant continued to work from that location while waiting for his car to cool down.  When the Defendant felt his car had cooled down, he left Roadchef Magor Services to drive home. The Defendant then received a PCN charge by post a few weeks later.

The first 2 hours were free parking, my brother took around 2 hours and 15 minutes, he lost track of time because he was busy working.

The rest of the defence is KeithP's template, plus points 3, 4, 6 and 7 were from hharry100's defence. Can I simply right click and save the images for the Civil Enforcement Ltd v Chan case in hharry100's defence, or is it available as a link to download?

Gr1pr

Nijinsky said:

The rest of the defence is KeithP's template,

plus points 3, 4, 6 and 7 were from hharry100's defence. Can I simply right click and save the images for the Civil Enforcement Ltd v Chan case in hharry100's defence, or is it available as a link to download?

I don't believe that Keithp has provided a template , I know that coupon mad has, plus there is an alternative defence for woeful POC that includes the chan case, typically seen in any defence based on the hharry100 exemplar