Jump to content

TIMTOM

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    31
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

0 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

121 profile views
  1. Wow thank you for that information. I honestly don't know who was driving, could have been my husband, either of my 2 sons or me. Honestly can't remember.
  2. This is the reply I received from my local Council when I requested confirmation that HIGHVIEW PARKING had received planning permission for erecting poles, signs and cameras. ”Hi There is no record of planning permission having been submitted. They may not however require permission as certain structures can be erected under the general permitted development order. Regards
  3. Hi I have copied and pasted my defence on the MCOL site. Just a couple of questions - do I click "No" to Do you want to issue a counterclaim? Also, do I fill in my phone no. and email address on the "My Defence - Service Details " page? Thank you.
  4. Thank you. Am I just looking at general private parking threads or specific to Bradfield Road Sheffield? What is the best way to view these?
  5. Thank you. Is the defence ok, do i need to attach any documentation or just file this on the MCOL site.
  6. Is this ok for my defence? Do I have to attach the letters I have received since December 2018 The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of [removed - HB] 2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all.
  7. I haven't received any other paperwork other than the 11 letter which I sent you earlier and which you kindly redacted for me. I know my defence isn't due until Friday, but I'm conscious that I might need more help with it so thought I would start it today. Maybe I'm being over cautious but i'm quite anxious about it. Sorry, that is where I copied and pasted from. thank you - again. @FTMDave said: Have a look at this thread https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/393251-received-a-court-claim-from-a-private-parking-speculative-invoice-how-to-deal-with-it-hereupdated-jun-2021/ and scroll down to Q2) How should I defend? Use that defence, tweaked of course if some points don't apply to you.
  8. Hi again. I have found a defence for a similar situation to mine which I will 'paste' below. I should be grateful if you would advise me if this is suitably worded and suggest any additions, deletions or amendments required. I know you said use your 4 line defence so maybe this is too much information? "The Defendant contends the particulars of the claim are vague and generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation. 1. A contract was never entered into by me. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant clearly states they were only contracted to provide car park management services, therefore is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account. The car park is owned by and terms of entry, set by the landowner. 2. It is admitted Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. The claimant is not in a position to state who the driver was at the time. 3. There are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied the Claimant is entitled to the recovery or any recovery at all."
  9. Hi again. I know this question was raised on another site but thought this may have been enough proof. I contacted parking services but they couldn’t help as it is a private car park. They suggested I should contact planning dept. I have done this and am awaiting their reply. I now need to compose my defence. Should I complete the form on the MCOL SITE and do I attach the documents you kindly redacted for me or do I send a letter? Thanks again for all your help and advice.
  10. No I haven't. I have looked this up on sheffield forum site and there are letters to Sheffield Council asking these questions with the reply. There is no proof that they have planning permission and all the other questions were answered with N/A. Is it a good idea to email Sheffield Council and ask these questions?
  11. Hi. My friend has helped me to scan the documents you have requested. He has send the files (pdf) to my email address as attachments. I have tried to forward them to you at (removed) but they are not in my sent folder. Would you let me know if you have received them. You should receive 11 in total. The dates on the documents are: High View Parking - 7.1.19 High View Parking - 29.1.19 High View Parking - 15.2.19 DRP - 18.3.19 DRP - 5.4.19 DRP - 23.4.19 SCS - 1.7.19 DCBL - 19.3.20 DCBL - 8.4.20 DCBL - 4.6.21 DCB LEGAL - 30.6.21 2018-12-28 highview pcn ending 2 with paploc.pdf
×
×
  • Create New...