OPS/Gladstones ANPR PCN Claimform - Broadwater Street West in Worthing, West Sussex

[ericsbrother]

of course they are specific to your case.

CPR 31.14 or CPR 31.6 request for documents shoudl be sent to the claimant in time to allow you to rubbish then in your defence but you have sat on that since the 10th dec so too late to be effective at this stage.

It wont hurt to send anyway as you cann still use in your WS if they dont want to produce it in their WS that they have failed to show authority etc.

Now frok now on you keep an eye on any deadline and make sure you stick to it. ask us for help by all means but you must do your homework so you understand what is going on, we cant be there to talk for you on the day

[KaBoom!!!]

Ok. I'll start the CPR requests with your points 1 to 3 and then the 1 to 3 in the template.

 

Silly question but in the template is the "Case Number" the Claim Number on the County Court Claim Form or the solicitors' Reference Number?

 

And have I exceeded the 33 days yet? Don't Christmas, Boxing Day and New Year's Day holidays count?

 

Thanks again!

Edited January 6, 2020 by KaBoom!!!
Extra info

[ericsbrother]

just send what i wrote and do so now or you may lose the claim because you  are worrying you dont know how many angels can dance on a pinhead.

you refer to claim number

[KaBoom!!!]

Lol. I'm nearly finished it. It was a lot easier than I thought. Do I mail it to them or email or both?

 

I have inserted the following:

 

Please treat this letter as my request made under CPR 31.14 for the disclosure and the production of a verified and legible copy of each of the following documents mentioned in your Particulars of Claim:

 

1. The Notice to Keeper was not compliant with the POFA so no liability whatsoever  has been created so there is no cause for action against the defendant in any capacity.

 

2. There was no parking event so no contract entered into and thus no breach of contract.

 

3. The land the vehicle was photographed on is maintained as a public highway and the claimant has no locus standi.

 

4. The contract between One Parking Solution Ltd and the landowner that assigns the right to enter into contracts with the public and make claims in their own name.

 

5. Proof of planning permission granted for signage etc under the Town and Country Planning Act 2007.

 

6. Copies of the notice to driver, notice to keeper and any other correspondence from One Parking Solution Ltd & Gladstones Solicitors to the defendant that they intend to rely upon in court.

 

 

Is that satisfactory?

Edited January 6, 2020 by KaBoom!!!
More info

[dx100uk]

defence is due weds by 4pm you get 1 extra day.

 

just send our PPC CPR 31:14 as is .

 

 

[KaBoom!!!]

I have emailed "[email protected]" with the letter and have received a standard reply...

[dx100uk]

Why dont you pay attention to what we've already advised at all???

never use email!!!

[KaBoom!!!]

I really didn't know that was a problem. What are the implications?

 

I am logged in to the MCOL website. I have already completed the Acknowledgement of Service. Is it correct to complete the Defence section now?

Edited January 6, 2020 by KaBoom!!!

[dx100uk]

because they will file important court document 1 min before a midnight deadline removing your opportunity to counter their lies.

 

you copy and paste the defence you wrongly inserted into our 31:14 template into mcol as your defence

 

now time to get reading up upon what is next

how to prepare 

and whats after that

there are 1000's of PCN claimform threads in this very same forum as yours.

 

dx

 

[KaBoom!!!]

Hi DX. I am really confused. Unfortunately I am off work at the moment and not very well. This is causing me significant stress.

 

I thought my defence was that it was physically impossible to park in any of the parking bays due to their being an obstruction and a notice in each one saying not to park there because access was required for emergency vehicles.

 

There was also a valid paid ticket for £2 covering 24 hours of parking in each bay.

I have photographic evidence of this.

 

Further the site has subsequently been re-planned and looks significantly different.

 

Do I enter any of that in the MCOL Defence page?

[dx100uk]

ericsbrother

•  

start off with 

 

1 The Notice to keeper was not compliant with the POFA so no liability whatsoever  has been created so there is no cause for action against the defendant in any capacity

 

2 there was no parking event so no contract entered into and thus no breach of contract

 

3 the land the vehicle was photographed on is maintained as a public highway and the claimant has no locus standi.

 

Now for the last point

you need to read Dawood v Camden decision and understand its implications.

 

No need to go into detail at this point, you can expand when it comes to writing a witness statement.

 

these points can be considered as stand alone or together to make a more complete argument but for the moment let them worry about that.

 

send copy to court and to their lawyers if using paper, just online if using MCOL

 

[KaBoom!!!]

Ok so I fill in the Defence section of the MCOL site with 1, 2 and 3 above and job done.

 

Everything about obstructions and notices saying not to park is put into my Witness Statement later.

 

Read Dawood vs Camden to prepare for what comes next.

 

Is that correct?

[dx100uk]

you have a few days, no read Dawood vs Camden to see if you feel a 4th point might be necessary.

 

post it up here 1st.

 

 

[KaBoom!!!]

Ok and thank you.

I will submit the defence later.

 

I've had a read of points 1 to 6 of Dawood vs Camden - not the easiest read for the legally illiterate.

 

What am I looking for in particular?

Is the road a highway?

Where does the parking restriction begin and end?

Do I need to get out of my vehicle to read the sign to determine this?

Am I on the right track?

[ericsbrother]

yes

now bock gladstones email addy and set emails to bounce back

[dx100uk]

dont submit yet

 

post it up here 1st.

 

 

[ericsbrother]

14 minutes ago, KaBoom!!! said:

Ok and thank you.

I will submit the defence later.

 

I've had a read of points 1 to 6 of Dawood vs Camden - not the easiest read for the legally illiterate.

 

What am I looking for in particular?

Is the road a highway?

Where does the parking restriction begin and end?

Do I need to get out of my vehicle to read the sign to determine this?

Am I on the right track?

It doesnt matter. you will buy yourself 6 months to read up on that but if you dont submit a defence by 4pm tomorrow you can ahve the greatest defence in the world and no-one will ever know because it wont get read.

 

BTW a hedge can be a highway in law and the answer is in your questions.

[KaBoom!!!]

Understood Ericsbrother! I'll have a defence up shortly  and post it here first. I've just had a look at the statutory definition of a road and how there isn't one for highway. Things you never knew!

 

Thank you all very much.

[ericsbrother]

that is all for 6 months hence. you are after bullet points at the moment and the fewer and  broader the  points the better.

 

Apart from a court clerk sending it back  for more detail a " no contact to breach " would be factually correct and wide enough to allow you to say anything but you are giving enough info to make the bandits consider dropping the claim before a hearing

[KaBoom!!!]

Looking at one of the other threads, Michael Browne posted on Dawood vs Camden,

 

"The judge ruled that although Dr Dawood owned "the subsoil" of the patch of ground, the tarmacked "surface" was subject to public access with no clearly definable boundary , so parking council restrictions and enforcement applied."

 

In my case the parking bays had clearly defined boundaries so does Dawood vs Camden imply that parking restrictions and enforcement didn't apply in my case as I couldn't physically park in a marked bay? 

[KaBoom!!!]

Ok this is what I am going to enter as my defence:

 

1. The Notice to Keeper was not compliant with the POFA so no liability whatsoever  has been created so there is no cause for action against the defendant in any capacity.

 

2. There was no parking event so no contract entered into and thus no breach of contract.

 

3. The land the vehicle was photographed on is maintained as a public highway and the claimant has no locus standi.

 

Having read points 1 to 6 of Dawood vs Camden I am considering adding

 

4. The parking bays had clearly defined boundaries so Dawood vs Camden implies that parking restrictions and enforcement didn't apply as it was not possible to park in a marked bay.

 

This could be complete bollocks but I am trying!

 

I have been waiting to hear from a solicitor who's a friend of the family but they haven't responded yet so I will submit the above shortly. Either 1 to 3 or 1 to 4 if  it's correct.

 

Many thanks

[dx100uk]

Wouldn't specifically say its public highway

[KaBoom!!!]

Is that because it’s private land?

 

So just 1 and 2 then? 1,2 and 4? Or amend 3 to say is maintained as a highway?

Edited January 7, 2020 by KaBoom!!!

[dx100uk]

we don't know.

 

3 the land the vehicle was photographed on is maintained as a public highway and the claimant has no locus standi.

 

what post has the evidence of photos backing this statement up?
 

 

[KaBoom!!!]

Getting them now