calm down and read things properly.

you post your strikeout letter to northants bulk tomorrow

you pop your proposed defence up here for checking

then once sorted you WAIT until the 6th before 4pm and file it on MCOL the same way you did the [AOS]

Thank you for advice.

Please kindly check if this will be good enough for the strike out letter?

Dear Sir/Madam,

Request a strike out for the case xxxxx . Parking and Property Management LTD v (defendant).

1. The claimant has no proof a notice to driver has been issued, as the driver at the event witnessed of the claimant operative actions and it is denied the claimed that a NTD has applied to the vehicle, therefore as Para 9 of POFA, stated the registered keeper needed to be informed within 14 days after the event, which in this case I was not informed within the time frame, therefore no keeper liability was created.

2. The claimant has failed to response CPR 31.14 request sent on 09/09/17 and received on 11/09/17.

The claimant has failed to comply with the above order and no documentation has been received by me by the deadline set of 21/09/2017, as the claimant has failed to produce any documentation and therefore broken the terms imposed by the court I am requesting the case be struck out.

Yours Faithfully,

(Sign)

i'll let eb comment

none of that is any use,

you havent read the Civil procedure regs otherwise you would know that you ask for the claim to be struck out

because:

1 PPM have not shown a cause for action against the defendant,

their claim is too vague to comply with CPR 16.4 in as much as it doesnt identify that the defendant has any liability

as it fails to identify the capacity for which they are being sued,

either the driver at the time or the keeper,

they do not say whether the claim is the result of a breach of contract and if so the nature of this or whether it is a claim for a contractual sum.

The amount of the claim does not reflect the amount advertised in the signage advertising the contract so it is not evident why the amount claimed is more than the supposedly advertised sum.

2. PPM have failed to show locus standi by way of responding to a CPR 31.14 request for sight of the contrct between themselves and the landowner that assigns the right to enter into contracts and to make civil claims in their own name.

3 PPM have failed to show evidence of planning permission for their sigange and equipment as required by the 2007 Town and Country Planning Act.

As it is a criminal offence to place advertising hoarding without such permissions any offer of a contract is void as it is not possible to enter into a criminal compact so PPM cannot show a cause for action.

The defendant requests a strike out of the claim under CPR 3.4 as the claim is an abuse of process

Thank you I'm glad I didn't send it yesterday..

. I will send it today,

it is also resonable to end the letter with 'please response if the strike out has been successful or unsuccessful. ' or skip it?

skip it, they dont respond.

If the application is successful you will be told

otherwise it becomes another document added to the pile the judge will have in frony of them on the day of the hearing

make sure that you add it to your evidence bundle if it gets to court.

I have to file a defence on 6th Oct on MCOL.

I saw in other threads EB suggested file a two line skeleton deference such as:

The defendant denies that any contract was formed between the palintiff and herself.

It is put to srtict proof that such a contract exists as there is no keeper liability under the POFA in this matter.

The Particulars of Claim contain no detail as to the nature of such a breach of a contract, the amount claimed does not reflect any contractual obligation and the general vagueness of the claim means that it is not possible to submit a proper defence.

Will this be good enough for my case or should I prepare a more in dept defences statement? Also anything in the meanwhile I can do?

Thanks

Kikic

first bit OK,

I would then add as point 2 (yes, number them) that in any case the signage at the site is inadequate to form a contact

then

3 the POC do not contain sufficient detail to show what is being claimed either in terms of monies due, whether it is for a contractual consideration or a breach of contract, and why the defendant is liable.

All this is contrary to CPR 3.4 and 16.4 and therefore it is impossible to submit a proper defence at this time.

4 The claimant has failed to show any authority from the landowner that assigns the right to enter into contracts with the public and to make civil claims in their own name by way of response to a CPR 31.14 request for documents.

The defendant believes that no such authority exists and the matter should be struck out as having no locus standi.

Now after this you have to do all of the other things you have failed to do,

get decent pictures of the signage,

find out who owns the land and whether that person owns all of the courtilage to the entire parade of shops or just where their sign is,

whether planning permission was sought for the signs,

Good evening EB, thank you for your help.

Deference statement for case xxxxx Defedant v Claiment.

1. The defendant denies that any contract was formed between the palintiff and herself. It is put to srtict proof that such a contract exists as there is no keeper liability under the POFA in this matter.

2. The Particulars of Claim contain no detail as to the nature of such a breach of a contract, the amount claimed does not reflect any contractual obligation and the general vagueness of the claim means that in any case the signage at the site is inadequate to form a contact.

3. The POC do not contain sufficient detail to show what is being claimed either in terms of monies due, whether it is for a contractual consideration or a breach of contract, and why the defendant is liable. All this is contrary to CPR 3.4 and 16.4 and therefore it is impossible to submit a proper defence at this time.

4. The claimant has failed to show any authority from the landowner that assigns the right to enter into contracts with the public and to make civil claims in their own name by way of response to a CPR 31.14 request for documents.

The defendant believes that no such authority exists and the matter should be struck out as having no locus standi.

So will this be ok for the defence statement?

Also next task to take picture of the signage,

because the NTK 'evidence images' shows at night time,

do I take pictures of the carpark during the night

(which I already did, as the signage was high up, I needed to zoom in) ,

so it will shows the signage was not clear enough and do I need to have a approx measurement of how high the signage were because I think it is placed too high up?

Would I need to contact PPM and ask if they have the planning permission for the signage or search online for the landowner details and ask the landowner?

Thank you

Kikic

No the local council planning dept

3. The POC do not contain sufficient detail to show what is being claimed

Does not

Take pictures night and day, and the height of the signs imho

No the local council planning dept

 

3. The POC do not contain sufficient detail to show what is being claimed

 

Does not

It's particulars of claim in the plural though, dx.

HB

on point 2 it should be vagueness of the claim AND in any case....

you take pictures in both daylight and at night without flash so try and avoid using your mobile as the CCD camera will automatically adjust to the conditions. what you want to show is how dificult it would be to read the sgnage in the dark, not how clever your phone camera is.

hi a quick question as im doing the MCOL now it asked me do i wanted to make a counterclaim? should i take yes?

hi a quick question as im doing the MCOL now it asked me do i wanted to make a counterclaim? should i take yes?

As I had to submit before I go work so I just ticked no to counter claim I don’t know if it affect anything I will do later

Thanks

good move, counterclaims are hard to progress, you are better off mainga separate claim if you want to sue them for breach of the DPA

Thank you for all your help and site team! I will make some contribution after all this hassle! It is very annoying and I can’t wait when is over!

sorry to say several stages still to go but we will guide you as best we can. Gladstones usually screw it up for their clients so you wont have to do much on the day if it does get to court

Unfortunately I received an EMAIL!! which was in my ‘Junk’ that was sent yesterday morning from one of Gladstone’s litigation assistant.

Email copied:

‘We act for the Claimant and have notified the Court of our Client’s intention to proceed with the claim.

Please find attached a copy of our Client’s completed Directions Questionnaire, which will be filed with the court upon their request. You will note we intend to request a special direction that the case be dealt with on the papers and without the need for an oral hearing

This request is sought simply because the matter is in our Client’s opinion relatively straightforward and the costs incurred by both parties for attending an oral hearing would be disproportionate.

You will note our Client has elected not to mediate. Its decision is not meant to be in any way obstructive and is based purely on experience, as mediation has rarely proven beneficial in these types of cases. Notwithstanding this, our Client would be happy to listen to any genuine payment proposals that you wish to put forward. ’

Along with N180 direction forms and n180 special direction form.

I had no idea how they got my email, it is because I left it on Mcol? I did request from signage permission and they said will reply before end of month and took more pictures of signage. How should I proceed next? Thanks

Hello there.

That's a pretty standard letter from these guys. They always suggest a hearing on paper because if people turn up and challenge them, they lose. You definitely don't agree to that. Please wait for the forum guys to advise, but as yet it seems they haven't activated the plan to go to court?

HB

as the lady says^^

have YOU received your N180 from THE COURT

Oh wow so Gladstone like to play it this way...

no I haven’t received any letter from court yet.

how do I stop them from contacting me through my email, just blocking them will solve the problem?

and remove the email from MCOL if I can?

Thanks

just ignore them

you only react to stuff from THE COURT.

yes, block their email.

They do this because it is a free way of harassing you, same as phone calls.

Note the content of their communication that says

"we have a big stick, you cant see it but it is real and if you dont do as we say we will get our friends to tell you that they are going to tell us to hit you with it.

If you dont believe us about the invisible stick then our friends wont talk to you at all and you will be sorry"

Hi all,

I had a response from the local council. I’m not sure if it any useful to my case?

‘I’ve been asked to respond to your email dated 16th October 17 regarding West Gate Plaza, 19 Moor Street, West Bromwich.

The type of sign that you’ve referred doesn’t usually need advertisement consent & I’ve never dealt with an application for such an application.

However I’ve had a look at the advertisement regulations and this type of sign should not exceed 0.3 square metres in area and should be non-illuminated.

Also it/they should be not more than 4.6 metres above ground level.

I understand you may be preparing a legal court case but in all honesty I don’t think we’d pursue an application, or take any enforcement action if the sign is slightly over what’s permitted as I doubt the signs are causing any loss of amenity.

Further I can’t find any record of any existing complaints to this department in relation to the sign.‘

Thanks