Tweet
Re: County Court Claim BW Legal - VCS Parking Charge Notice
Is this not the defence you filed ?
I'm off tomorrow now so we should work on your witness statement and get it done by email (obtain any email addresses you'll need asap). It needs filed by 1600.
M1
Originally posted by InnocentMotorist
View Post
In the County Court Business Centre, Northampton
Claim No.: XXXXX
Between
XXXXX (Claimant)
and
XXXXX (Defendant)
__________________________________________________ _________________________
Defence Argument
__________________________________________________ _________________________
1. BW Legal are a known Roboclaim firm who file claims without doing any due diligence and without properly establishing any debt is due. At the time of filing a claim they have not even received a copy of the purported contract from the claimant and so cannot possibly meet the practice direction requirements for filing a claim.
2. The particulars fail to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4 and Practice Direction 16, paragraphs 7.3 7.5 (see Appendix 1) as they do not contain a copy of the contract, and do not explain how the contract was concluded. It is allowable to file these within 14 days as additional particulars if they do not fit on the claim form under PD16 3.2(2) and 3.3. However, the claimant did not do this.
https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/pr...l/rules/part16
https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/pr...rt16/pd_part16
3. As an example as to why this prevents a defence being filed at this time, a parking charge can be for trespass, breach of contract or a contractual charge. All these are treated differently in law and require a different defence. The wording of any contract (as required by PD 16, para 3.7) will naturally be a key element in this matter, and a copy of the alleged contract has never been provided to the Defendant
4. The claimant can file these as further particulars within 14 days as per PD16 3.2(2), but have failed to do so
5. Practice direction 22 para 3.1 sets out who may sign a statement of truth. Para 3.10 states that A legal representative who signs a statement of truth must sign in his own name and not that of his firm or employer.
https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/pr...rt22/pd_part22
6. The claim is signed by BW Legal. This therefore does not comply with the requirements.
7. The Defence therefore asks the court to strike out the claim as having no reasonable prospect of success as currently drafted.
8. Alternatively, the Defendant asks that the claimant is required to file particulars which comply with practice directions and include at least the following information
a. Whether the matter is being brought for trespass, breach of contract or a contractual charge, and an explanation as to the exact nature of the charge
b. A copy of any contract it is alleged was in place (eg copies of signage)
c. How any contract was concluded (if by performance, then copies of signage maps in place at the time)
d. Whether keeper liability is being claimed, and if so copies of any notice to driver/notice to keeper
e. Whether the Claimant is acting as agent or principal, together with a list of documents they will rely on in this matter
f. If charges over and above the initial charge are being claimed, the basis on which this is being claimed
g. If interest charges are being claimed, the basis on which this is being claimed
9. Once these particulars have been filed, the Defendant asks for reasonable time to file a defence
10. Alternatively, as the claimant has not filed proper particulars of claim, the following generic defences are applicable, and can be expanded upon once the particulars have been filed
h. No contravention occurred
i. No contract was entered by performance as the signage was not frequent or clearly visible or readable while driving
j. No contract existed as there was no offer as the wording on the signage was forbidding
k. The contract was non-binding as it did not comply with the information requirements of the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation And Additional Charges) Regulations 2013, enacted 13 June 2014
l. The charge was a penalty and/or unfair consumer charge and is not saved by ParkingEye v Beavis as the claimant has not shown how that applies
m. The location appears to be a public road and the Claimant has not shown they have the authority to issue charges and take court action with a clear chain of authority from the landowner
n. Keeper liability has not been established and the defendant was not the driver
o. The Equalities Act 2010 applies and the defendant should have been allowed a reasonable adjustment
I believe the facts stated in this Defence Statement are true.
.
(Defendant) (Date)
Claim No.: XXXXX
Between
XXXXX (Claimant)
and
XXXXX (Defendant)
__________________________________________________ _________________________
Defence Argument
__________________________________________________ _________________________
1. BW Legal are a known Roboclaim firm who file claims without doing any due diligence and without properly establishing any debt is due. At the time of filing a claim they have not even received a copy of the purported contract from the claimant and so cannot possibly meet the practice direction requirements for filing a claim.
2. The particulars fail to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4 and Practice Direction 16, paragraphs 7.3 7.5 (see Appendix 1) as they do not contain a copy of the contract, and do not explain how the contract was concluded. It is allowable to file these within 14 days as additional particulars if they do not fit on the claim form under PD16 3.2(2) and 3.3. However, the claimant did not do this.
https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/pr...l/rules/part16
https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/pr...rt16/pd_part16
3. As an example as to why this prevents a defence being filed at this time, a parking charge can be for trespass, breach of contract or a contractual charge. All these are treated differently in law and require a different defence. The wording of any contract (as required by PD 16, para 3.7) will naturally be a key element in this matter, and a copy of the alleged contract has never been provided to the Defendant
4. The claimant can file these as further particulars within 14 days as per PD16 3.2(2), but have failed to do so
5. Practice direction 22 para 3.1 sets out who may sign a statement of truth. Para 3.10 states that A legal representative who signs a statement of truth must sign in his own name and not that of his firm or employer.
https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/pr...rt22/pd_part22
6. The claim is signed by BW Legal. This therefore does not comply with the requirements.
7. The Defence therefore asks the court to strike out the claim as having no reasonable prospect of success as currently drafted.
8. Alternatively, the Defendant asks that the claimant is required to file particulars which comply with practice directions and include at least the following information
a. Whether the matter is being brought for trespass, breach of contract or a contractual charge, and an explanation as to the exact nature of the charge
b. A copy of any contract it is alleged was in place (eg copies of signage)
c. How any contract was concluded (if by performance, then copies of signage maps in place at the time)
d. Whether keeper liability is being claimed, and if so copies of any notice to driver/notice to keeper
e. Whether the Claimant is acting as agent or principal, together with a list of documents they will rely on in this matter
f. If charges over and above the initial charge are being claimed, the basis on which this is being claimed
g. If interest charges are being claimed, the basis on which this is being claimed
9. Once these particulars have been filed, the Defendant asks for reasonable time to file a defence
10. Alternatively, as the claimant has not filed proper particulars of claim, the following generic defences are applicable, and can be expanded upon once the particulars have been filed
h. No contravention occurred
i. No contract was entered by performance as the signage was not frequent or clearly visible or readable while driving
j. No contract existed as there was no offer as the wording on the signage was forbidding
k. The contract was non-binding as it did not comply with the information requirements of the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation And Additional Charges) Regulations 2013, enacted 13 June 2014
l. The charge was a penalty and/or unfair consumer charge and is not saved by ParkingEye v Beavis as the claimant has not shown how that applies
m. The location appears to be a public road and the Claimant has not shown they have the authority to issue charges and take court action with a clear chain of authority from the landowner
n. Keeper liability has not been established and the defendant was not the driver
o. The Equalities Act 2010 applies and the defendant should have been allowed a reasonable adjustment
I believe the facts stated in this Defence Statement are true.
.
(Defendant) (Date)
Is this not the defence you filed ?
I'm off tomorrow now so we should work on your witness statement and get it done by email (obtain any email addresses you'll need asap). It needs filed by 1600.
M1
Comment