Pursued by Moorside Legal

shockedandappalled

can you please give me an example case.

this is my section 3 defence …

is located
within a residential complex where my son then resided and I had
parked there on previous occasions when visiting him without
incurring PCNs. I was shocked to receive the PCN and I asked my
soto scour the car park for signage. He reported to me there was
none. This happened within a day of my receiving the PCN.
Subsequ3ntly, and I am regrettably unable to be date specific, and
in response to correspondence from the claimant and a debt
recovery firm, I asked my son to look again in the car park and
surrounds for relevant signage. Again, he reported there was none.
My son moved away from the residence in September 2024.
I would not choose to contest these proceedings, which have caused
me no little distress and anxiety, were it not for the fact of
there being no signage, and of being able to verify that as fact.
I was offended by the claim that I had ignored signage and
subsequently by the bullying, threatening, (CCJ, loss of future
access to credit) and coercive manner in which the claimant has
pursued me. There have been letters, texts and emails. I will be
supporting my defence with witness testimony.

I would appreciate comments.

Coupon-mad

This is the wrong para 3 for Moorside defences.

You were not advised to write your story nor to write something from scratch, in fact you don't need to compose anything because the Template Defence thread already provides a link to a fully written Moorside example, twice.

shockedandappalled

I have clearly fundamentally misunderstood how para 3 should be completed. However, having looked at the template defence para 3 it seems to me that the ‘particulars of claim’ are set out and the details of my alleged ‘breach’ clearly stated. Also, my defence is the absence of signs, surely that needs including here? Do I not also refute the allegation that I ‘agreed to pay’, which is false?

Coupon-mad

 Do I not also refute the allegation that I ‘agreed to pay’, which is false?

It's not false. It alleges the driver agreed to pay (by conduct of parking in a place with signs). It's a normal contract law phrase used in a contractual parking scenario. They don't mean you chatted to them and verbally agreed!

shockedandappalled

OK, so do I simply copy para 3 from a previous Moorside case, without addressing the ‘particulars of claim’? I recall reading ‘para 3 is yours to write’, hence my approach.

shockedandappalled

@Coupon-mad, Got it. I have now used the standard Moorside defence para 3. Reading more, my ‘story’ would previously have been para 6, where do I now tell my story? 

Gr1pr

Concisely,  in paragraph 3, or a proper story in your Witness Statement plus Exhibits bundle in several months time,  instead, so if the POC are light on details,  save stories for the Witness statement,  which is why it's called that

shockedandappalled

Well @Gr1pr my defence is quite simply that neither my son or I saw, or subsequently detected, any signage relating to penalty charges for parking. Include that?

Gr1pr

UKCPS have never issued penalty notices , or penalty charges, so you definitely will never see them , meaning that you would never include them

The signage formed the contract with the driver,  regardless of whether they were seen or not

James_Poisson

You won't see any signs for any "penalty charges" there should be signs relating to contractual charges.

Stating that you didn't see any needs to be backed up with photographic evidence. 

You were told that on the 27th February.