Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • QuackNuts
    • By QuackNuts 9th May 18, 1:42 PM
    • 13Posts
    • 8Thanks
    QuackNuts
    Help for defence for Court Claim
    • #1
    • 9th May 18, 1:42 PM
    Help for defence for Court Claim 9th May 18 at 1:42 PM
    Please could I have some help with a court claim form. I understand to register with MCOL gives more time to get the defence sorted. As Loadsochildren points out "you only get one chance". To summarise the defence: No notice to driver was issued. The Notice to Keeper was issued after 15 days. No period of parking is stated - just one photograph. Signage is inadequate. (Name on Court paper may be wrong - need to check the V5)
    We want to claim costs too. I have the misfortune to be dealing with District Enforcement and their ever unhelpful mates Gladstones. This is a small part of a nasty situation and I understand PPC trawl these sites. I'm new to this so I hope I can PM the sensitive stuff if need be.

    Any help is greatly appreciated.
Page 1
    • Redx
    • By Redx 9th May 18, 4:10 PM
    • 18,115 Posts
    • 22,902 Thanks
    Redx
    • #2
    • 9th May 18, 4:10 PM
    • #2
    • 9th May 18, 4:10 PM
    find a few gladrags defences over the last 12 months , especially any DE ones, draft the defence and post it below for critique

    that is how it works

    post first, ask the questions later and hone the defence accordingly , if in doubt add paragraphs anyway and ask for feedback on them

    until this has been done , nobody will make serious comment about your case

    first job is do that AOS, there are walkthroughs on this in post #2 of that NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread, including a timeline of events by BARGEPOLE

    there is nothing new about your case, so just follow the others that have gone before you , you are not the first and wont be the last
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 9th May 18, 4:53 PM
    • 17,577 Posts
    • 27,789 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    • #3
    • 9th May 18, 4:53 PM
    • #3
    • 9th May 18, 4:53 PM
    I notice you started a new thread to ask a further question about your case. Please do not do so. One case, one thread, everything contained in it so that advice is always set in the light of consolidated detail and context.

    Everything from here on about this case - post in this thread only. Thank you.
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • QuackNuts
    • By QuackNuts 10th May 18, 10:56 AM
    • 13 Posts
    • 8 Thanks
    QuackNuts
    • #4
    • 10th May 18, 10:56 AM
    • #4
    • 10th May 18, 10:56 AM
    Hi Umkomass, the other thread is for 3 different cases, I've got over 10 so far. Will follow your instructions, I appreciate your help.
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 10th May 18, 1:19 PM
    • 17,577 Posts
    • 27,789 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    • #5
    • 10th May 18, 1:19 PM
    • #5
    • 10th May 18, 1:19 PM
    Hi Umkomass, the other thread is for 3 different cases, I've got over 10 so far. Will follow your instructions, I appreciate your help.
    Originally posted by QuackNuts
    Are they with different PPCs, or the same PPC but relating to different dates?
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • QuackNuts
    • By QuackNuts 16th May 18, 10:36 AM
    • 13 Posts
    • 8 Thanks
    QuackNuts
    • #6
    • 16th May 18, 10:36 AM
    • #6
    • 16th May 18, 10:36 AM
    Sorry for the late reply. I've been trying to clear some of the backlog of work while I've been researching all this.

    They are the same PPC but different dates, most are different vehicles but a couple of vehicles have got two each.

    This Court Claim is for one vehicle for one date and has been sent to the keeper. The vehicle was in our care at the date of charge but the driver has not been named. The keeper has acknowledged the receipt of service online but at the moment I'm waiting for the keeper's defence so it can have a read through.

    I am so grateful for the help you provide and will write to my MP about PPC's and their horrendous harassment. Hopefully sanity will return soon.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 17th May 18, 12:28 AM
    • 57,449 Posts
    • 71,044 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #7
    • 17th May 18, 12:28 AM
    • #7
    • 17th May 18, 12:28 AM
    OK, show us the draft defence in good time, for comments.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • QuackNuts
    • By QuackNuts 21st May 18, 10:55 AM
    • 13 Posts
    • 8 Thanks
    QuackNuts
    • #8
    • 21st May 18, 10:55 AM
    • #8
    • 21st May 18, 10:55 AM
    Ok, so here's the draft defence at last, anything that should be added/taken out? Any help is much appreciated.
    In the County Court
    Claim Number: -----------
    Between
    District Enforcement Ltd v --------------.

    DEFENCE STATEMENT

    1. The Claimant has no right to pursue this amount because no Notice to Driver was issued and the Notice To Keeper was not delivered within the relevant period as stated in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 (POFA), paragraph 9(4 and 5.)
    2. The Particulars of Claim claims the Defendant was the driver of the vehicle and that is not the case and is against their ATA’s Code of Practice (Part C 1.3.) It is denied that the Defendant was the driver of the vehicle. The Claimant is put to strict proof.
    3. The Particulars of Claim contains no details and fails to establish a cause of action which would enable the Defendant to prepare a full defence.
    4. The Claimant has at no time provided an explanation how the “parking charges/damages and indemnity costs” have been calculated, the conduct that gave rise to it or how the amount has escalated from £100 to £160. This appears to be an added cost with apparently no qualification and an attempt at double recovery, which the POFA Schedule 4(5) specifically disallows.
    5. There is no information regarding why the charge arose, what the original charge was, what the alleged contract was, nor anything which could be considered a fair exchange of information.
    6. The Claimant had provided no proof of a period of parking as specified in POFA Schedule 4, paragraph 9(2) The claimants have only provided evidence that the vehicle was at the site for a moment of time.
    7. The Defendant avers that the parking signage in this matter was, without prejudice to his/her primary defence above, totally inadequate.
    8. At the time of the event the signage was deficient in number, distribution, wording and lighting to reasonably convey a contractual obligation.
    9. The driver did not enter into any 'agreement on the charge', no consideration flowed between the parties and no contract was established.
    10. The Defendant denies that the driver would have agreed to pay the original demand of £100 to agree to the alleged contract had the terms and conditions of the contract been properly displayed and accessible.
    11. The signage did not comply with the requirements of the Claimants ATA’s Code of Practice.
    12. There was contradicting signage within the same car park which is placed in a more prominent and readable format. This signage mentioned no time restraints and contradicting fines.
    13. The claimant has not provided a copy of their written contract with the land owner.
    14. The Claimant is not the landowner and is merely an agent acting on behalf of the landowner and has failed to demonstrate their legal standing to form a contract.
    15. The Claimant is put to 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.
    16. The Claimants are known to be serial issuers of generic claims similar to this one. HM Courts Service have identified over 1000 similar sparse claims. It is believed that the term for such behaviour is ‘roboclaims’ and as such is against the public interest.
    17. The Defendant denies the claim in its entirety, voiding any liability to the Claimant for all amounts due to the aforementioned reasons. The Defendant asks that the court gives consideration to exercise its discretion to order the case to be struck out under CPR Rule 3.4, for want of a detailed cause of action and/or for the claim having no realistic prospects of success.

    I confirm that the above facts and statements are true to the best of my knowledge and recollection.

    Name - Signed - Date
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 21st May 18, 12:33 PM
    • 57,449 Posts
    • 71,044 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #9
    • 21st May 18, 12:33 PM
    • #9
    • 21st May 18, 12:33 PM
    DEFENCE STATEMENT
    NOT 'statement' just DEFENCE

    Re this:
    16. The Claimants are known to be serial issuers of generic claims similar to this one. HM Courts Service have identified over 1000 similar sparse claims. It is believed that the term for such behaviour is 'roboclaims' and as such is against the public interest.
    Not true of DE, so remove it. It's true of BW Legal, but not 'the Claimant'.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

3,156Posts Today

8,566Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • It's the start of mini MSE's half term. In order to be the best daddy possible, Im stopping work and going off line? https://t.co/kwjvtd75YU

  • RT @shellsince1982: @MartinSLewis thanx to your email I have just saved myself £222 by taking a SIM only deal for £7.50 a month and keeping?

  • Today's Friday twitter poll: An important question, building on yesterday's important discussions: Which is the best bit of the pizza...

  • Follow Martin