ECP DCB LEGAL claim 2025

BigToad31

So if I'm reading this right here, the signatory here (Sarah Ensall) is not SRA listed and therefore should not be drafting/signing legal documents and the above paragraphs should be added to the defence along with my own point RE the claim 

Coupon-mad

Yes, and most of the rest of the template defence but you'll have to make it concise and remove repetition.

This is bombshell case law. A grenade.

Le_Kirk

BigToad31 said:

Okay so I will process the AOS on Sunday 28th as that's 5 days from issue.

With an issue date of 23/09/25 and having completed the AoS in a timely manner

your defence deadline date is 4.00 p.m. on 27/10/25

BigToad31

Thanks all, am I okay to post my proposed defence here for review once drafted?

BigToad31

Fro reference, the AOS has now been submitted.

I'm due to go on holiday 02/10/2025 so I will have a first draft written by 01/10/2025 with an aim to submit most likely W/C 06/10/2025 after I've gon ethrough it all

BigToad31

Thought you may want to read the statement of truth based on other forum posts:

I understand that proceedings for comtempt of court may be brought against a person who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in it's truth.

The claimant believes that the facts in this claim form are true. I am authorised by the claimant to sign this form.

Coupon-mad

She can't conduct litigation. You can use the replacement end paragraphs seen in the Bay Sentry thread about Mazur v Speechlys. 

BigToad31

Okay thanks, I've written up a rough 1st draft of defence and would like to hear your thoughts, paragraphs 1,2, 4-8 are from the Template thread and paragraphs 9 -12 are from the Bay sentry thread (https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6629202/bay-sentry-via-dcb-legal-issue-date-9th-september-poc-has-pleaded-the-alleged-contravention/p2 ). Below is my own paragraph 3 (in bold I will likely remove but left in for reading). I am also in two minds whether to remove paragraph 6 from the defence as I don't see this as relevant to my case but I am welcome to your thoughts

3.  The defendant fully denies that the Claimant is entitled to the sum claimed, or any sum at all. The Claimant alleges that the Defendant is liable for a parking charge on the basis that no valid pay-and-display ticket or permit was purchased. The defendant disputes and denies this allegation. On the date in question (16/10/2024), the defendant purchased and displayed a valid pay-and-display ticket for the duration of the stay in reference of the alleged vehicle **Enter REG here**. The defendant retains the original pay-and-display ticket, as well as contemporaneous evidence of payment, including a bank statement confirming the transaction. This documentary evidence demonstrates that the parking fee was duly paid in accordance with the terms of parking as per the signage within the parking area. As the parking fee was correctly paid, there was no breach of contract or parking terms. Accordingly, no debt arises, and the Claimant has no cause of action. The Defendant further avers that the bringing of this claim despite clear evidence of payment is unreasonable and amounts to an abuse of process. The defendant therefore invites the Court to strike out the claim in its entirety and to award the Defendant their costs for having to defend a meritless action.

Coupon-mad

Good. See what fits into the MCOL box.

BigToad31

On MCOL it states, Do you dispute the claim because you have already paid it? *

Does this relate to the claim amount or does it refer to the initial fee paid for parking?

Also, I'll need to take out or condense some lines in para 3 as the ladt quarter of para 11 and para 12 don't fit in the defence box.

If needs be I'll take out para 6 perhaps?