PARKINGeye wrong address at county court claim stage

[Happygoodman]

The layout has come up a bit weird. Its very clear on the original. main points are numbered with an indented list with roman numbers detailing the main point.

[charitynjw]

Imho it needs a bit of TLC.
One step at a time
In your commentary where you are distinguishing 'Beavis', if it were me I'd make it clearer that, whereas in 'Beavis' the car park served multiple outlets & so freeing up space was important, in this (your) case the car park served only the restaurant, the parking regime was in all likelihood a measure to prevent 'non' customers from occupying spaces, that you were a legitimate customer, & to penalise legit customers in this way would in all likelihood be detrimental to the restaurant.
Although not strictly a legal argument, imho it's pure common flamin' sense!

[Happygoodman]

Hi! Thank you for last post which I think I must have accidently deleted. Here are some amendments. If there is anything else that could be improved on do let me know! As I say, you have been invaluable and I'm learning so much!

1. The signage in the tunnel, placed to the left and right, was dark and not visible. They would not be in focus of the driver’s vison who was looking ahead at where he was going. This was a single road and if his vison was to the left and right he may have crashed into a car leaving the carpark. In addition, Parking Eye suggest in their defence that the car’s headlights would have lit up the signs. This is inaccurate as the signs were placed higher than the head of the driver sitting in the car. Head lights are not designed to point upwards or sideways. Their aim is to be dead straight or below-at 0% (metre off the round) to 2% which reaches to the floor. I would like to respectfully draw your attention to the Government’s ‘Statutory Guidance: MOT Inspection Manuel-Cars and Passengers-Section 4 1.’ In addition, it is not Parking Eye’s responsibility to ensure that headlights are working properly. It is their responsibility to put up prominent signs. (Exhibit CC, DD)

1. Parking Eye, in their defence, in the Parking Eye v Beavis case (2015) quote Lord Mance: ‘what matters is that a charge of the order of £85…is an understandable ingredient of a scheme serving legitimate interests. Customers using the car park agree to the scheme by doing so.’

We would draw the courts attention to the Cargius Case again. Judge C. Mahy remarks ‘Beavis…dealt with FREE carpark where only charges recovered by Parking Eye were from motorists who overstayed. Thus it was argued that the parking charge of £85.00 levied on overstays was commercially justifiable, as this was the only revenue received by Parking Eye for managing what was otherwise a free carpark. This was not the case here. Parking Eye are charging a significant sum of money to motorists…who park for two to four hours pay a £1.00 per hour…’

I would like to point out that in the 'Beavis' case the car park served multiple outlets so freeing up space was important,. However, with this particular case the car park served only the restaurant and the hotel and the parking regime was in all likelihood a measure to prevent 'non' customers from occupying spaces. It would seem that as the defendant was a legitimate customer, to penalise legit customers in this way would rather than serving ‘legitimate interests’ would, in all likelihood be detrimental to the restaurant and hotel. Furthermore, the landowners, with respect of this fact, twice contacted Parking Eye and asked them to cancel the parking charge. (Exhibit QQ)

[charitynjw]

Given the size of your defence (ie number of characters used) it will not fit in the MCOL web form.
If you send it as an attachment to an email to the court, or via land mail (you'll have to allow 2 working days for this) you will need to add & sign the statement of truth.
Also, you'll need to head it

In the [Northampton County Court Business Centre]

Claim No: [XXXXX]

[Claimants Name]

Claimant

And

[Defendants Name]

Defendant


& a defence should always include:-

DEFENCE

1. The Defendant received the claim [Claim Number] from the [Name of Court – often Northampton or Salford] County Court on [Date you received the claim]

2. Each and every allegation in the Claimants statement of case is denied unless specifically admitted in this Defence.

Insert/dete in the green bits as necessary.

[Happygoodman]

Darn. I have sent it via post (a large bumph of photos etc today as it had to get there for the 10th July). I headed it but did not put in the points 1 and 2. Shall I email separately and ask them to add to the posted stuff? P E too?

[Happygoodman]

I sent the bumph special delivery so guaranteed to arrive on 9th.

[charitynjw]

I sent the bumph special delivery so guaranteed to arrive on 9th.

Give it a go.....you don't ask, you don't get.
It might be ok, as your defence will not have been served on the other party yet.

Email the court.
In subject box put 'Amended Defence - [Them] v [You] Claim No [XXXXXX] -

In the email, or better yet, as an attachment

In the [Northampton County Court Business Centre]

Claim No: [XXXXX]

[Claimants Name]

Claimant

And

[Defendants Name]

Defendant

Amended Defence under CPR 17.1 (2)(a) dated [XX/YY/ZZZZ]
(To be added to the beginning of the defence submitted on [date])


1. The Defendant received the claim [Claim Number] from the [Name of Court – often Northampton or Salford] County Court on [Date you received the claim]

2. Each and every allegation in the Claimants statement of case is denied unless specifically admitted in this Defence.

[Happygoodman]

Will do.
'as your defence will not have been served on the other party yet'
I sent a copy of defence to Parking Eye
as the CC said to do that. Was that right? And should I send the extra email to them too?

[charitynjw]

Will do.
'as your defence will not have been served on the other party yet'
I sent a copy of defence to Parking Eye
as the CC said to do that.
Was that right? And should I send the extra email to them too?

Are you sure?
Normally, for MCOL cases, the Defendant just files the defence at court.
The court then serves it on the Claimant, often (though not always) requiring them to respond within a given time period (28 days is often allowed.)
If you are not using MCOL, then a copy of your defence should be served on all other parties. (CPR 15.6)

[Happygoodman]

Okay. Just spoken CC and they said I was right to send copy to PE. I have also emailed points 1 and 2 which they said they could add.

'Amended Defence under CPR 17.1 (2) (a) dated xxxxx'

I put the deadline date in there i'm guessing?

'defence submitted on xxxxx'

here I put in when I sent it?

[Happygoodman]

Sorted. Ignore last thread. Fingers crossed.

[Happygoodman]

I'm confused-have sent evidence and defence off. Have to hand in Witness Statement tomorrow. Court case on 5th Aug. Working on WS a bit more. Can I add some extra photos as evidence with my WS? Or is that all done with defence? I have spoken to CC twice about this and not clear.

[Happygoodman]

Have been online here, mixed feedback. PE have sent their Witness statement and extra evidence 4 days late which hasn't given me much time to read over as hearing this Monday 5th. I immediately emailed courts (as away) to say this was unjust. Anything more I can do?

[Happygoodman]

Case struck off!!!!!!!! I argued to Judge that I could not read an 89 page document in one day (as was away when it was emailed) and that ParkingEye were using the delay of 4 days to tighten their witness statement. The Judge agreed and asked PE to pay for expenses.
thank you Charity NJW, thank you for being so patient with what must have seemed at times very basic questions on my part. Thank you Legal Beagles. I have learnt so much. There is no way I could reached this stage without your help.