Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I've inserted their poc re:your.. 1 ..they did send 2 paploc's  3. neither the agreement nor default is mentioned in their 2.        
    • Hi Guys, i read a fair few threads and saw a lot of similar templates being used. i liked this one below and although i could elaborate on certain things (they ignored my CCA and sent 2 PAPs etc etc) , am i right in that at this stage keep it short? If thats the case i cant see what i need to add/change about this one   1)   the defendant entered into a consumer credit act 1974 regulated agreements vanquis under account reference xxxxxxx 2)   The defendant failed to maintain the required payment, arrears began to accrue 3)   The agreement was later assigned to the claimant on 29 September 2017 and notice given to the defendant 4)   Despite repeated requests for payment, the sum of 2247.91 remains due outstanding And the claimant claims a)The said sum of £2247.91 b)The interest pursuant to S 69 county courts act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of issue, accruing at a daily rate of £xxxx, but limited to one year,  being £xxxx c)Costs   Defence:   The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim vague and are 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. The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC ( Pre Action Protocol) Failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017.It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.   2. The Claimant claims £2247.91 is owed under a regulated consumer credit account under reference xxxxxxx. I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant and the claimants solicitor by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request who are yet to fully comply.   3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged agreement or any default notice served in breach of any defaulted payments. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied.The Defendant contends that no notice of assignment pursuant to s.136 of the Law of Property Act & s.82 A of the CCA1974 has ever been served by the Claimant as alleged or at all.   5. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31. 14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:   (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence any cause of action and service of a Default Notice or termination notice; and © show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   6. After receiving this claim I requested by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a section 78 request for copies of any documents referred to within the Claimants' particulars to establish what the claim is for. To date they have failed to comply to my CPR 31.14 request and also my section 78 request and remain in default with regards to this request.   7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, 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 credit Act 1974.   9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.  
    • i understand. Just be aware I am prepared to take some risks 😉
    • Thanks Tnook,   Bear with us while we discuss this behind the scenes - we want you to win just as much as you do but we want to find the right balance between maximising your claim without risking too much in court fees, and in possible court costs awarded to the defendant bank.
    • Tell your son and think on this. He can pay the £160  and have no further worries from them. If he read POFA  Scedule 4 he would find out that if he went to Court and lost which is unlikely on two counts at least [1] they don't do Court and 2] they know they would lose in Court] the most he would be liable to pay them is £100 or whatever the amount on the sign says. He is not liable for the admin charges as that only applies to the driver-perhaps.If he kept his nerve, he would find out that he does not owe them a penny and that applies to the driver as well. But we do need to see the signage at the entrance to the car park and around the car park as well as any T&Cs on the payment meter if there is one. He alone has to work out whether it is worth taking a few photographs to help avoid paying a single penny to these crooks as well as receiving letters threatening him with Court , bailiffs  etc trying to scare him into paying money he does not owe. They know they cannot take him to Court. They know he does not owe them a penny. But they are hoping he does not know so he pays them. If he does decide to pay, tell him to wait as eventually as a last throw of the dice they play Mister Nice Guy and offer a reduction. Great. Whatever he pays them it will be far more than he owes as their original PCN is worthless. Read other threads where our members have been ticketed for not having a permit. [We know so little about the situation that we do not know if he has a permit and forgot to display it. ]
  • Our picks


UKPCM/gladstones Claimform - PCN operator pix - pensby Road

Recommended Posts

sounding good. 

I have taken more photos and hopefully made the whole thing clearer.

Image list:

1 – front of the row of shops – indicating parking at rear.
2 – Entrance to rear of shops / parking area
3 – the rear area
4 – rear area

5 – the rear of the restaurant with the “parking at rear” sign on the front of the shop indicating my parked position (parked as such due there being obstructions / rubbish preventing parking closer to the wall)
6 - a parking sign from CPM nothing to do with the restaurant

7 - a parking sign from CPM

8 – No parking bay, designated area, nor road markings of any type.




cag phl photos.pdf

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

so sigm says for restaurant use only but like any other shop there they dotn have the authority to give away all of the parking spaces that cover the entire block. As CPM wont have any authority to tell peopel how to park anywhere other than on their clients land how are you supposed to identify this land as there are no marked bays etc.


They will ahve to show some authority and a lack of signage as you turn into the side entrance that leads to the parking bays makes it impossible to consider anything othwr than the order to park there if using the restaurant and that is confused witht eh vets parking instructions.


Even if CPM has a valid contract the confusion wil make it impossible for any one to knwo what is being offered, esp as there is a prohibitive aspect to the offer anyway

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was also hoping to see images of the front of the shops and a view down the whole parade so it is clear that it is a contiguous development and not a number of separately owned buildings. Also if there are any signs out the front we want those to appear in pictures as well. Unless you drive a buklldozer though the building to see where you end uphow are you supposed to know what business the signs refer to?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I get what you are saying and I really need to file my defence but am still unsure of exactly what it should say? 


I have now also taken a picture of the entire row of shops but am Unsure what my 3 line defence should be at this stage. 


Sorry to need it completely laying out for me, but I just don’t  Want to get it wrong....

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

reread this entire thread for starters, it is all here.

Yiou must understand that YOU have to do the work becasue YOU are being sued and YOU will have to attend court and defend yourself. We cant hold your hand and answer questions for you so you have to understand what is going on and it will be better if you write what you think it shoud be and we will offer advice on polishing it up rather than you copy someone else's homework


so pointers.

no contract formed because....

no keeper liability, no locus standi as their agreement is with someone who has no authority to enter into such a contract

the signage is unclear/misleading/ not applicable to where your vehicle was at the time

no planning consent for signs

so reread the thread and pick out where these points are made and see what else is said about the whole thing. there will be more detailed points you can make later but you need somehtig to hang the other arguments on


I once spent 2 days going through accounts to enable a friend of mine to sue an ex-tenant of his for the correct amoutn as payments over the year had been sporadic and piecemeal.

Once all the accounts were done all he had to do was to show that £x was owed from jan and then another amount from feb ect until you reached the final bill at the end of the year plus the statutory interest. the judge asked him how much in total was owed and he said " I dont know, someone else did all the paperwork"

It is your business to know so best you do as asked and write something dwon. We arent here to belitte you but to hopefully get you to understand what needs to eb doen so it is less scary

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. 

I did take further pictures (uploaded) and shall now formulate my defence based on your helpful pointers. 


cag rwu.pdf

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

post it up here for us to read then.

One point you will need to remember for the actual witness statement. there is no street number that is obvious on either the front or back of the building and that plays to your advantage and the shoddy sign at the front has limited no parking times and says no parking outside designated parking bays. Well, the whole of the rest fo the world would be covered by this idiotic term and there are no marked bays anyway so they are offering nothing to consider and that means you cnat breach thier terms because they have no offer, consideration and acceptance.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...