IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including QR codes, number plates and reference numbers.
County court claim for parking please help
Options
Comments
-
Hey guys, court date looming!! Any advice or pointers on this skeleton argument draft is much appreciated :::
thank you all!
Cameron Inch (Defendant)
Skeleton Argument of Cameron Inch (Defendant)
Preamble:
1. This skeleton argument is to assist the court in the above matter for the hearing dated 07/12/2017.
2. The witness and the accompanying witness statement is not credible. It contains invalid, false and vexatious statements which can be shown in this skeleton argument. Moreover, it displays a laissez-faire attitude towards submitting a truthful, factual witness statement.
3. The defendant will highlight to the court that the claim is not only fundamentally misconceived and flawed, but that the claimant behaved unreasonably.
4. The witness statement by Kiran Ali is contradictory, confusing and untruthful.
Issues:
1. Paragraph #2 in the claimant’s witness statement suggests that Parkwood Management’s contract with the landowner grants them the right to enter into contract and confer the authority upon the claimant. The claimant has not provided this contract.
2. The claimant has failed to produce strict proof that this contract with the managing agent is still continuing after the initial 12 month period for which it is written for.
3. Exhibit KA/1 suggests that No stopping or waiting is allowed anytime in the area, yet signage on site suggests that No parking is allowed between the hours of 7-11am. The claimant’s signage on site is different to the contract terms and conditions.
4. Exhibit KA/2 from the claimant shows images of signs they are suggesting are on site. The defendant would ask the claimant to put strict proof that these are the signs actually on site and not just a generic image of a sign that could be anywhere. The defendant submits that these signs do not match the actual ones on the site.
5. In paragraph #3 of the claimants witness statement, it states that the driver agreed with the terms and conditions of parking. The defendant denies ever agreeing to the terms and conditions as I never knew what they were. As seen from the poorly photographed evidence the claimant has produced, the terms and conditions are unreadable on the claimants signs.
6. How can anybody be entered into a contract when the terms are unreadable, confusing and contradictory.
7. Paragraph #4 of the claimant’s witness statement suggest the defendant broke the terms by parking on yellow lines or parking in an area with hatched markings. The defendant denies this on all occasions mentioned. As clearly seen in the evidence provided by the claimant themselves, it is clear the defendant is not parked on yellow lines or in an area with hatched markings.
8. The defendant would like to point out that Exhibit KA/2 page23 is a totally different sign to the ones photographed in Exhibit KA/3 page 54. The defendant questions the reliability of the claimants witness statement as they have provided generic images of signs which do not match those on site.
9. Exhibit KA/3 page 59 is a Parking charge notice that was issued at 22:01, for being parked on yellow lines. The images of the vehicle in question it can not be seen if the vehicle was on yellow lines or not. It is submitted that the defendant was not parked on yellow lines and therefore believes the claimant is bringing a claim without any reasonable consent. IT is also noted that the picture of the signage (page 70) states no parking between 7-11am, and a PCN has been issued at 22:01. It is believed the claimant is simply issuing PCN’s without any actual case.
10. The evidence provided by the claimant in Exhibit KA/4 is questioned by the defendant. I submit that I never received a letter before claim. The defendant notices that this evidence is not on the usual headed paper provided by SCS law and does not actually state it is a letter before claim.
11. In paragraph #12 the claimant has brought a confusing, contradicting and simply untrue paragraph. They have stated that in some of the photographs it can be seen there are bays for those who are authorised to park. This is simply untrue and It is questioned if the author of this witness statement has ever actually been to the site because they would know that this is not the case.
12. Also in paragraph #12, it states that parking was permitted in areas of the site that was not marked in yellow lines with the relevant authorisation. Authorisation was granted with residency as shown in my own witness statement, and I was never parked on yellow lines so it is again questioned what the actual claim is brought for
13. It is submitted by the defendant that the only area which is free from yellow lines is the area in which he was parked in.0 -
How about at 14.It was held by the Lord Chancellor in Keppell v Bailey that:
Great detriment would arise and much confusion of rights if parties were allowed to invent new modes of holding and enjoying real property, and to impress upon their lands and tenements a peculiar character, which should follow them into all hands, however remote.
Raises the question as to whether this is a new burden being put on the tenants after an agreement had been put in place by the Landlord.0 -
is this how a skeleton argument should be looking? i have kind of just made points about the claimants witness statement and evidence and no mention of any case law... is this to be added?
I am confused as to what the intention of the skeleton argument is... is it a response to the evidence? or is it simply meant to be my defence but in a more bullet pointed reference...0 -
Just added these points also...
14. The evidence provided by the claimant is poor, confusing, and unclear. It is clear from the claimant’s own evidence, that the terms and conditions on these signs could not ever be read and seen enough to form a contract with the defendant.
15. The defendant Is bemused by the witness’s statement paragraph #12 that the signage was not forbidding. The claimant is not offering a contractual parking agreement so they cannot issue a charge for something not on offer.
16. The signs on site are prohibitive and cannot create a contract with a driver. The defendant refers the court to the persuasive case of PCM v Bull in which District Judge Glen ruled that there was never any contractual relationship due to the prohibition against parking at any time.0 -
Para1 add the claimant has not done so either because they are unable to do so or because the intention is to ambush the defendant in a manner in which the CPR rules were created so as to prevent
Para2 add if the contract has not continued the claimant has neither authority to issue a ticket nor to bring these proceedings.
Para4 add and, in the alternative if, which is denied, the signage is that from the site, the photos appended to the statement should stand as evidence in chief that they are not legible to visitors
Para6 replace with any parking terms such as there may be on signage were illegible, confusing or contradictory, such that it is submitted that the alleged contract is void for uncertainty note: read this https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=2a81495f-8ade-4a49-a98d-5d8d472993ae
Para9 delete "consent" and replace with "basis". Add the claimants own photographic evidence provided no evidential basis for the particularised claim At the end of the para add the Defendant being parked at a time during which parking was permitted0 -
Para11 add it is averred that the witness statement is merely an adapted template, containing a number of inaccuracies, such that it is unreliable. Further evidence of such misleading error is likely to become evident after cross examination of Ms Ali at trial. The defendant invites the court to draw an adverse inference from any failure of the witness to attend trial
Note though that there is conflicting law on the point (read more here https://www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk/news/failure-call-witnesses-give-evidence/ ) and that if you lost the case (which you may consider unlikely, but is still a litigation risk) you could have to pay the witness costs of attending in addition.0 -
The skelly is a short form version of your best points - your case and the epic problems in the defendant case.
Since the claimants whole case often hangs on one witness statement, I can see why you focus on it. However do make your best case.
Perhaps add sub headings - defence case, lack of supporting evidence from claimant and defects in claimant witness evidence.
Add case authority where you can.0 -
As ever... Just some thoughts. Do make sure YOU are happy with and understand everything you send off to court.0
-
Thank you for this! I will edit this tonihht with your pointers...
Also.. does an NTK have to state it is an NTK on it? Also the same question with the LBC does it have to state it’s an LBC? I never received an LBC but they have put one in their evidence file.. I have reason to believe that this has been drafted after! Everything I have received has been on headed paper, this isn’t! It’s on my Dropbox link if you had any pointers on it I can mention!
Many thanks again!!0 -
I never received an LBC but they have put one in their evidence file..
Mention it as an illustration of the poor systems at Gladstones as it calls into question the claims they are making and whether they are based on fact but made up after the event.
It's not a killer but it is a blow.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards