I have received a summons from Salford County Court with Date of Service as 24/11/14
Particulars of Claim
1. The Car Park is private property owned / leased by The Co-operative Group Limited of 1 Angel Square, Manchester, M60 0AG. The address of the Car Park is xxx and at all material times the Car Park was managed by Civil Enforcement Limited on behalf of The Co-operative. The debt was assigned to the Claimant with the knowledge of The Co-operative.
2. By way of background, the Operator uses vehicle plate recognition on the entrance and exit of the car park, which works by capturing images of the text displayed on vehicle number plates. In the car park there are many clear and visible signs displayed advising drivers of the terms and charges applicable when parking in the car park.
3. Drivers are permitted to park in the car park in accordance with the terms displayed on the signage. These signs constitute an offer by the Operator to enter into a contract with drivers. The Operators recorded the Defendant’s vehicle, registration xxx entering the car park on 18/02/2012 at 13:04 and departing on 18/02/2012 at 16:12. When the Defendant parked their vehicle in the car park they accepted, by their conduct, the Operator's pricing structure.
4. The Defendant was allowed to remain in the car park in consideration for agreeing to pay £90.00 (reduced to £45.00 if paid within 14 days) to the Operator. Consequently, a contract was formed between the Operator and Defendant and as a result of the Defendant’s conduct £90.00 is owed by the Defendant.
5. The Defendant did not take up the offer to pay the reduced amount of £45.00 within 14 days. The Defendant failed to pay the agreed £90.00 and as a result the Operator (directly / through its agents) was left with no alternative it to write to the Defendant several times in respect of their non-payment of the debt which increased as a result by £40.00
6. Further the claimant claims interest pursuant to section 69 of the county courts act 1984 on the amount found to be due to the claimant at such rate and for such period as the court thinks fit
AND the claimant claims
amount of £215, alternatively, damages for breach of contract, alternatively, damages for trespass
Mr M Shwarts (Solicitor) – no firm mentioned
Position held - Solicitor
I have acknowledged service.
I have written to the SRA about the 'solicitor'.
I believe that I should submit a Defence in the following terms but would like your comments:
DEFENCE
1 I received claim number xxxxxx on 2nd December 2014 issued by the SALFORD COUNTY COURT with a date of service of 24th November 2014.
2 The Defendant denies that he is liable to the Claimant either as alleged in the Particulars of Claim or at all. Save as specifically admitted in this Defence, the Defendant denies each and every allegation set out in the particulars of claim'.
3 Paragraph 1 of the Particulars of Claim; the Defendant is unable to admit or deny, but which he requires the claimant to prove.
4 Paragraph 2 is admitted; the Defendant is unable to admit or deny, but which he requires the claimant to prove.
5 Paragraph 3 is admitted insofar as the Defendant was the owner of the vehicle. It is denied that the Defendant was the driver.
6 Paragraph 4; the Defendant denies that he was the driver so couldn’t have entered into contact with anybody.
7 Paragraph 5 is denied. The Defendant was not the driver and denies receiving any letters about this matter until receiving these court papers.
8 Paragraph 6 is denied. The Defendant was not the driver.
9 The date of the claim is 18th February 2012 and as this predates the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 which was passed on 1st May 2012 the Claimant is not entitled to rely on ‘keeper liability‘. The Defendant has never admitted being the driver and the Claimant is not entitled to presume that the Defendant was the driver.
10 The person named as the acting solicitor, Mr M Shwarts (Solicitor) is not on the Solicitors’ Regulation Authority register though he is known to have regularly signed Claim forms issued by this Claimant. I have written to the Solicitors’ Regulation Authority to see if Mr Shwarts has asked for his name removed from the register.
11 In the event that the Claimant does not withdraw this claim I would also put them to strict proof that:
a) the solicitor is registered with the Solicitors’ Regulation Authority and provide his contact details
b) a solicitor prepared the claim and charged the Claimant £50 to do it.
12 It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the amounts claimed or any interest on such amounts.
13 I request the court orders the Claim be struck out as it has no merit and no hope of succeeding.
Statement of Truth
I believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true.
Dated this 4th day of December 2014
To the court and to the Claimant
Thanks for taking the time to read this.
Particulars of Claim
1. The Car Park is private property owned / leased by The Co-operative Group Limited of 1 Angel Square, Manchester, M60 0AG. The address of the Car Park is xxx and at all material times the Car Park was managed by Civil Enforcement Limited on behalf of The Co-operative. The debt was assigned to the Claimant with the knowledge of The Co-operative.
2. By way of background, the Operator uses vehicle plate recognition on the entrance and exit of the car park, which works by capturing images of the text displayed on vehicle number plates. In the car park there are many clear and visible signs displayed advising drivers of the terms and charges applicable when parking in the car park.
3. Drivers are permitted to park in the car park in accordance with the terms displayed on the signage. These signs constitute an offer by the Operator to enter into a contract with drivers. The Operators recorded the Defendant’s vehicle, registration xxx entering the car park on 18/02/2012 at 13:04 and departing on 18/02/2012 at 16:12. When the Defendant parked their vehicle in the car park they accepted, by their conduct, the Operator's pricing structure.
4. The Defendant was allowed to remain in the car park in consideration for agreeing to pay £90.00 (reduced to £45.00 if paid within 14 days) to the Operator. Consequently, a contract was formed between the Operator and Defendant and as a result of the Defendant’s conduct £90.00 is owed by the Defendant.
5. The Defendant did not take up the offer to pay the reduced amount of £45.00 within 14 days. The Defendant failed to pay the agreed £90.00 and as a result the Operator (directly / through its agents) was left with no alternative it to write to the Defendant several times in respect of their non-payment of the debt which increased as a result by £40.00
6. Further the claimant claims interest pursuant to section 69 of the county courts act 1984 on the amount found to be due to the claimant at such rate and for such period as the court thinks fit
AND the claimant claims
amount of £215, alternatively, damages for breach of contract, alternatively, damages for trespass
Mr M Shwarts (Solicitor) – no firm mentioned
Position held - Solicitor
I have acknowledged service.
I have written to the SRA about the 'solicitor'.
I believe that I should submit a Defence in the following terms but would like your comments:
DEFENCE
1 I received claim number xxxxxx on 2nd December 2014 issued by the SALFORD COUNTY COURT with a date of service of 24th November 2014.
2 The Defendant denies that he is liable to the Claimant either as alleged in the Particulars of Claim or at all. Save as specifically admitted in this Defence, the Defendant denies each and every allegation set out in the particulars of claim'.
3 Paragraph 1 of the Particulars of Claim; the Defendant is unable to admit or deny, but which he requires the claimant to prove.
4 Paragraph 2 is admitted; the Defendant is unable to admit or deny, but which he requires the claimant to prove.
5 Paragraph 3 is admitted insofar as the Defendant was the owner of the vehicle. It is denied that the Defendant was the driver.
6 Paragraph 4; the Defendant denies that he was the driver so couldn’t have entered into contact with anybody.
7 Paragraph 5 is denied. The Defendant was not the driver and denies receiving any letters about this matter until receiving these court papers.
8 Paragraph 6 is denied. The Defendant was not the driver.
9 The date of the claim is 18th February 2012 and as this predates the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 which was passed on 1st May 2012 the Claimant is not entitled to rely on ‘keeper liability‘. The Defendant has never admitted being the driver and the Claimant is not entitled to presume that the Defendant was the driver.
10 The person named as the acting solicitor, Mr M Shwarts (Solicitor) is not on the Solicitors’ Regulation Authority register though he is known to have regularly signed Claim forms issued by this Claimant. I have written to the Solicitors’ Regulation Authority to see if Mr Shwarts has asked for his name removed from the register.
11 In the event that the Claimant does not withdraw this claim I would also put them to strict proof that:
a) the solicitor is registered with the Solicitors’ Regulation Authority and provide his contact details
b) a solicitor prepared the claim and charged the Claimant £50 to do it.
12 It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the amounts claimed or any interest on such amounts.
13 I request the court orders the Claim be struck out as it has no merit and no hope of succeeding.
Statement of Truth
I believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true.
Dated this 4th day of December 2014
To the court and to the Claimant
Thanks for taking the time to read this.
Comment