Parking charge - permit on show but not in bay

Thanks!

So I have followed the guidelines and have highlighted questions I have in red please;

A1 - no to mediation service
B - My details *can the address be different to the registered address of the car?*
C1 - Yes to small claims
D1 - put down my local county court
D2 - No to expert advice
D3 - *Would this be 1 or should I get people in the flat block to provide witness statements to support the fact this is a scam etc? Or can it still be one but I can have this as evidence?*
D4 - no holidays booked, no to interpreter

**I have only just received my DQ in the post, and have not received the N159 form from the claimant, via the county court - I was going to print this off and send along with my DQ and covering letter - please advise if I should hold fire until I receive it in the post or whether this is ok**

---

For my cover letter would you propose something like this - how do I address them etc? Thank you!

Dear County Court Business Centre

Please find my Directions Questionnaire attached along with the N159 form with my opposition of having this claim based on papers alone. Additionally, as per the CPR, I also request the claim is dealt with at the defendant’s home court, as the defendant is an individual.


I have two separate claims XXXX and XXXX, and these roboclaims are an abuse of the process and are a waste of the court's time and resources where the facts in dispute are essentially the same [Res Judicata]. This also appears to be an added cost with no qualification and an attempt at double recovery, which the POFA Schedule 4 specifically disallows.


I ask the court to strike out one of the claims, or in the alternative, make an order of the court's own volition to avoid wasted resources, requiring that the Claimant re-files the claim with full particulars as one single claim, also evidencing on what basis the Claimant believes there is a cause of action and how they believe they are able to override the rights and easements and peaceful enjoyment of residents, without being a party to the lease. This would also allow me to provide a full defence as the Particulars of Claim, in both cases, fail to refer to the material terms of any contract and neither comply with the CPR 16 in respect of statements of case, nor the relevant practice direction in respect of claims formed by contract or conduct.

Kind Regards
Miss XXXXXXX

---

Apologies - I kept forgetting to go back to the Newbies thread. Please correct me if I am wrong, but I could not find guidance on cover letters etc. Thank you!

*NOTE - I received the same email from the claimant for the other claim a day later. Can I just respond to one claim to ask for them to be merged? Or can I essentially complete it exactly the same*

Any guidance would be much appreciated please as this is due by 18th October so I realistically need to send this off soon. Thank you!

Johnersh wrote: »

Res judicata (not that the Courts really use the Latin anymore) is the doctrine that a matter has already been adjudicated upon. That simply doesn't apply here. Each claim form concerns different alleged parking incidents.

Thank you! I will forget this quote, I must have misunderstood how to use it.

Johnersh wrote: »

What you need to ask for is that the claims are consolidated and heard together. You should also make the Court aware that the Defendant has issued two separate sets of proceedings to pay the lower £25 Court issue fee in respect of both (a total of £50) rather than the actual fee that should apply to a dispute with a value in excess of £800, namely £60.

The issuing of two sets of proceedings is nothing more than a device to subvert payment of the appropriate fee that is increasing use of Court resources and which is wholly inappropriate. You and the Court should not be put to the time and expense of dealing with two matters. There is good case law to the effect that claims should not proceed where the appropriate fee has not been paid.

The appropriate draft directions (in my view) are as set out below. Ideally, you'd apply for this. However, if the Court is so minded, you may get away with a written request:

UPON reading the letter of the Defendant dated [date]
AND UPON the Court's Case Management Powers pursuant to CPR Parts 3.3 and 3.4
IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. Claim numbers XXXXXXX and YYYYY be consolidated and heard together.

2. UNLESS the Claimant o pay the balance of the appropriate Court fee, namely £10.00 within 14 days of this Order, the claim be struck out.

3. UNLESS the Claimant do file and serve within 14 days of this Order a fully particularised Amended Particulars of Claim in respect of all matters giving rise to Parking Charges, to include details of the terms of any alleged contract between the Claimant and Defendant and any alleged contract entitling the Claimant to issue parking charges, the claim be struck out.

4. The Defendant do have permission to file and serve an Amended Defence, such Defence to be filed within 14 days of the Amended Particulars of Claim.

5. The Parties may apply to set aside or vary this Order within 7 days of service.

Does this allow me to submit an amended defence then within 14 days? I haven't mentioned the lack of evidence of who was driving which apparently is a strong point?

Thank you so much for this! Is there somewhere I can readily find this information myself? For example the court fees I was not aware of but it is probably a strong point in my case to get the claim thrown out (I would guess?).

How do I also request a Part 18 or does number 3 cover this where I am requesting full details of the claims?

Lastly and sorry for a million questions, can I send both claim responses in the same envelope along with the covering letter to group them together?

Thanks again Johnersh - appreciate the support!!

Johnersh wrote: »

I was proposing you write to the court with the DQ and say you are confused as to why you should have to deal with two similar matters at once - it cannot make sense. The only reason you can think of is that C is seeking to avoid proper payment of court fees (spell it out as above).

You should also say that there is no detail in either case. You have tried to predict the issues in both the defences, but it is an impossible position to be in and you don't think that any proper positive case has been advanced.

If the court were so minded, it may be that these matters can be best "tidied up" into a single set of proceedings.

<UPDATED - is this ok now? too much??
Dear County Court Business Centre

Please find my Directions Questionnaire for both claims XXXX and YYYY attached along with the N159 form with my opposition of having both claims based on papers alone. Additionally, as per the CPR, I also request the claim is dealt with at the defendant’s home court, as the defendant is an individual.

I have two separate claims XXX and YYYY, and these roboclaims are an abuse of the process and are a waste of the court's time and resources where the facts in dispute are essentially the same. This also appears to be an added cost with no qualification and an attempt at double recovery, which the POFA Schedule 4 specifically disallows. These two separate sets of proceedings allow the Claimant to pay the lower £25 Court fee, totalling £50, rather than the actual fee that should apply to a dispute with a value in excess of £800, namely £60. I am confused why I have to deal with two similar matters at once.

Additionally, there was no detail in either case in order for me to file a proper defence. I tried to predict the issues in both the defences, but it is an impossible position to be in and I don't think that any proper positive case has been advanced. If the court were so minded, it may be that these matters can be best "tidied up" into a single set of proceedings.

UPON reading the letters of the Claimant dated [28th September 2017 and 29th September 2017]
AND UPON the Court's Case Management Powers pursuant to CPR Parts 3.3 and 3.4
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. One claim is struck out
2. OR in the alternative, Claim numbers XXXXXXX and YYYYY be consolidated and heard together.
2. UNLESS the Claimant pays the balance of the appropriate Court fee, namely £10.00 within 14 days of this Order, both claims be struck out.
3. UNLESS the Claimant do file and serve within 14 days of this Order a fully particularised Amended Particulars of Claim in respect of all matters giving rise to Parking Charges, to include details of the terms of any alleged contract between the Claimant and Defendant and any alleged contract entitling the Claimant to issue parking charges, the claim be struck out.
4. The Defendant do have permission to file and serve an Amended Defence, such Defence to be filed within 14 days of the Amended Particulars of Claim.
5. The Parties may apply to set aside or vary this Order within 7 days of service.
Kind Regards
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Johnersh wrote: »

I leave it with you as to whether to send the draft order, because the risk is that you are, in effect, making a court application if you do that, whilst ducking payment of the fee yourself... If you did apply to Court, you'd probably get the fee back as the conduct of the claimant is poor at best.

As matters stand and unless the court orders otherwise you need two defences and to respond to all existing timescales.

So if I send this I could be charged £60 to get the two claims put into one? But I can claim this back?

I am ensuring I respond to each case etc (I am just copying the same for each). BUT, can I send responses to both DQ together with one cover letter? Or is it better to respond separately with the same cover letter on each?

Thanks again!!

Johnersh wrote: »

I would send separate letters to avoid the Court staff assuming that the documents were duplicates of one another (which at a glance they may appear to be).


No. You may wish to think about making an application to Court to have the two claims consolidated and to request that proper particulars are prepared. That will cost £100, but if you win (and I suspect you would, given the provisions of the CPR) then you would likely get it back. The application would be done on the papers without a hearing, so there are no hearing costs. If you were successful (i) they would be put to the expense of preparing the case properly; (ii) you would be fighting 1 consolidated case not 2; (iii) you would have greater clarity much earlier, before witness statements and the opportunity to revise the Defence accordingly; (iv) the Claimant would probably be ordered to pay your application costs given that their pleading is defective.

As I say above, it depends whether you can afford the risk in the context of the dispute and what you gain. Most forum users endeavour to ask the Court for something without lodging an application, because of the cost. Consolidation of the claims is a no-brainer. You may as well flag that they have under-paid court fees and that you are prejudiced in preparing the defence as there is scant information provided.

Yes I can't really afford the risk (I am worried I will lose). Can I therefore ask the judge to do this without completing an application? Would this be written along the lines of the below in the cover letter?

I ask the Court to make order of it’s own initiativ; **IS THIS CORRECT?**
1. One claim is struck out
2. OR in the alternative, Claim numbers XXXXXXX and YYYYY be consolidated and heard together.
2. UNLESS the Claimant pays the balance of the appropriate Court fee, namely £10.00 within 14 days of this Order, both claims be struck out.
3. UNLESS the Claimant do file and serve within 14 days of this Order a fully particularised Amended Particulars of Claim in respect of all matters giving rise to Parking Charges, to include details of the terms of any alleged contract between the Claimant and Defendant and any alleged contract entitling the Claimant to issue parking charges, the claim be struck out.
4. The Defendant do have permission to file and serve an Amended Defence, such Defence to be filed within 14 days of the Amended Particulars of Claim.
5. The Parties may apply to set aside or vary this Order within 7 days of service.