Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • ok looks like that's what you need to do. but keep it bare bones for now as post 5  
    • stuff and all if there no signed agreement in the return   dx  
    • 1st again why do you keep changing things before you send them   you've added counterclaim in to our std CPR 31:14 you sent? why? this opens you up to additional costs and I hope you didnt tick counterclaim when you did AOS on mcol too?   also I notice you've  played with our std OD defence above too...   pers I would refrain from continuing to change things as they are written in the frain they are for specific reasons.   your defence is due by 4pm Monday [day 33]   here are 2 versions you will ofcourse need to adapt them to lowells para no's and remove the NOA stuff as your docs show Lowell have complied with those. but don't forget to mention other documents provided to date notably statements contain no proof they came from Lloyds but rather Lowells own internal data system    dx   1. It is admitted with regards to the Defendant entering into an Agreement referred to in the Particulars of Claim ('the Agreement') with the [insert original creditor] . .  2. The defendant denies that the account exceeded the agreed overdraft limit due to overdrawing of funds but is as a result of unfair and extortionate bank charges/penalties being applied to the account. .  3. I refute the claimants claim is owed or payable. The amount claimed is comprised of amongst others default penalties/charges levied on the account for alleged late, missed or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety. .  4. It is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer crediticon Act 1974. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon. .  5. The claimant is denied from added section 69 interest within the total claimed that as yet to be decided at the courts discretion. .  6. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. .  The claimant is also put to strict proof to:-. .  (a) Provide a copy agreement/facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception, that this claim is based on.  (b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.  (c) Provide a breakdown of their excessive charging/fees levied to the account with justification.  (d) Show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.  (e) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.  (f) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct. .  7. On receipt of this claim I requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request dated [xxxxxxx] namely the Agreement and Termination Demand Notice referred to in the claimants Particulars of Claim. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request. .  By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. .  .............. or  Particulars of Claim  1.The claim is for the sum of 2470.56 in respect of monies owing pursuant to an overdraft facility under account number XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX.  2.The debt was legally assigned by Santander UK Plc to the claimant and notice has been served.   3.The Defendant has failed to repay overdrawn sums owing under the terms and conditions of the bank account.   The Claimant claims:  The sum of 2470.56 Interest pursuant to s69 of the county courticon Act 1984 at a rate of 8.00 percent from the 7/04/2015 to the date hereof 14 days is the sum of 7.58Daily interest at the rate of .54  Costs Defence  The Defendant contends that the particulars of the claim are vague and generic in nature. 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. It is admitted with regards to the Defendant once having had banking facilities with the original creditor Santander Bank. It is denied that I am indebted for any alleged balance claimed.   2. Paragraph 2 is denied.I am not aware or ever receiving any Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925. It is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer crediticon Act 1974. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon.   3. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Original Creditor has never served notice pursuant to 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974  Any alleged amount claimed could only consist in the main of default penalties/charges levied on the account for alleged late, rejected or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbeyicon National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety.  4. As per Civil Procedureicon Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.  The claimant is also put to strict proof to:-.  (a) Provide a copy agreement/overdraft facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception that this claim is based on.  (b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.  (c) Provide a breakdown of all excessive charging/fees and show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.   (d) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.  (e) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct.  5. On receipt of this claim I requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request dated April 2015 namely the Agreement and Termination Demand Notice referred to in the claimants Particulars of Claim. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request.   By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.  Regards  Andy    
    • Hi   Just read your thread and looked at the Docs posted in your PDF.   1. from AST to rent a Car Parking space you need to have signed a Car Parking Agreement for a Space and for visitors you should have asked permission for another space in advance with a fee to pay. (i also assume renting a parking space would be at a cost)   2. You have no signed Car Parking Agreement nor visitor space agreement.   Did you not fully read that AST before you signed it and pick up what is stated about parking and ask them about this Car Parking Agreement and if you need one to park in the car park?   You could formally complain to them about what was verbally said to you but unless you have evidence of this it may be hard to prove.   You should also contact them and ask how you go about renting a Car Parking space/costs and about the Car Parking Agreement also what the process is for a visitor car parking space/costs.   You need to be aware that they could class you and your visitor as illegally parking in there car park without consent nor a signed car parking agreement which they could use as a Breach of your Tenancy Agreement so you need to be careful in how you are approaching this and where you are parking.   Just for info on checking Manchester Life website they have numerous buildings/apartments/car parks but you may be in a building where some of the apartments are leasehold and as part of there leasehold they may have purchased a car parking space in that building. (so how do you know you are not parking in a space that someone in the building has legally purchased?)
  • Our picks

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 314 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi All,

Please, I need urgent help. I lost the case against Napier Parking in Country Court.

I parked the car on the access road on the verge. I was confused by the road sign on opposite road which shows terms and conditions. And I thought the sign in front of my car shows that I can't park on the main road.

Because of that judge decides that I breach terms and condition between me and Napier parking.

What do you think? Are do is worth to appeal Judge decision or pay fine. (FCN)

Thank you

napier parking.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you enter into any correspondence with them at all or did you just ignore their letters? Where is your defence?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not worth it

Set aside/appeal costs more than the judgement

 

Put down to experience sadly

 

Was it a forthwith judgement or montly sum?


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you used completely the wrong arguments for this site, it is well known on this forum and Napier havent on another claim there.

 

 

Unfortunately this is the end of the road and you ahve to pay up.

 

 

If you get another parking charge notice come here first and we will be able to help you and hopefully avoid going to court in the first place.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My defense was:

 

 

WITNESS STATEMENT OF

 

 

 

1. I'm ____________ the defendant in this claim no ________. The facts in this statement are true and come from my best personal knowledge.

 

2. I make this witness statement to support my defense again Claimant’s – Napier Parking Limited

 

3. Claimant claims in Claimant Background section 5 and SIGNAGE section 35 that Claimant is Accredited member and Approved operator and is full compliance with IPC code of practice for private enforcement on private land and unregulated car parks. This code of practice gives recommendations in regards to the signadge within the car parks and the Claimant follows these recommendations.

I‘m willing to know from what date Claimant start follow this code of practice with recommendations on they operated land, because after their issued me with Fixed Charge Notice they changed FCN signs and build additional signs around the road. Difference between old and new signs plan shows on pictures nr.1,2,3,4 and 5, please, see attached photocopies.

 

4. Claimant claims in Claimant Background section 6 and 7, that Claimant issued FCN on the terms and conditions displayed on site plan page 3 and 4 of RK1 and ONE sign displaying the Terms and Conditions which shows at page 5 of RK1.

According to the Independent Parking Committee - Code of Practice PART E ` Schedule 1 - Signage Signs should, where practicable, be placed at the entrance to a site. Otherwise, the signage within the site must be such as to be obvious to the motorist. Repeater Signs You are required to provide a sufficient number of signs on each site commensurate with its size and other characteristics to ensure that any parking conditions are adequately brought to the attention of the motorist.

 

 

 

5. Claimant claims in Claimant Background section 8 and 9, that all motorist follows the terms and conditions of the Site. Which terms and condition displayed on signage “ACCESS ROAD”. Claimant claims in “THE DEFENDANT’S BREACH OF THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS “section 11, that the defendant’s vehicle was parked at the Car Park in full view of the claimant’s sign displaying the Terms and Conditions.

If Claimant not sure which agreement he offers, this contract cannot be complete if the terms and conditions if even are not fully laid out. These conditions must not be vague or ambiguous. A contract will not usually be seen as legally binding if the terms and conditions are unclear.

 

6. Claimant claims in section 23, that defendant does not deny parking or stopping his vehicle on the verge, in breach of the terms and conditions. In section 27 claimant claims that defendant never appeals FCN within 21 days.

First I never got the formal letter from claimant within 21 days and second I never have been made an agreement with Napier Parking Limited.

 

7. Claimant claims in LOCUS STANDI section 32, that Claimant has a legitimate commercial interest to issue FCN.

IPC Code of Practice PART E Schedule 5 – Parking Charges state as damages to an operator of breaching Terms and Condition.

 

 

 

I believe that the details and the facts in this statement are true.

 

__________________

 

Dated this 5 September 2018

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

No, I thought that signs are misleading and I'm ignoring the letters. I read some forums :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just pay up, you have no chance of winnng an appeal and that will just cost you a shed load of money anyways.

Next time you get a parking claim come here first, you defence is incoherent and without loads of other stuff not convincing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...