CEL ANPR PCN claimform - no permit -Fox restrnt Connault Hse Hotel Lynx way Lon E16 1JR ***Claim Discontinued***

[ericsbrother]

Look, you arent going to get a court date this side of christmas so dont worry about your holiday. the courts wont even send you the allocation questionnaire that soon if things are normal.

 

All you need to submit at the moment is an outline of your defence and that will be a couple of bullet points plus a request that the court use its management powers to dismiss the claim as having no merit by its own voilition as the POC is inadequate and the whole thing an abuse of Civil Procedure.

 

so what do you have- no keeper liability and you werent the driver. Inadequate signage, signage not compliant with POFA/ATA CoP so no contract can be performed by CEL. Also hotel refused to give customer permit so no contract can be formed ( doesnt say you have to display permit or get it before parking and you were refused help from hotel)

 

We are happy to help but this is not our court case so you need to knuckle down and do some proper reading up of your own as you ahve already been told. if you dotn understand it how can you talk about it in dec/jan if they do decide to break the habit of a lifetime and turn up?

 

Also have you slagged the hotel chain off online yet? facebook, twitter etc. open a twitter account jusy to do this if necessary. Ideally you want to make them think you will drag them along as witnesses ( law allows it but you have more chance of going to the moon than getting that enforced unless you qualify for legal aid). When you beat CEL you can go bakc and gloat and tell them that their parking management co are dishonest and uselesss to boot (no need to get your libel lawyers on standby, just look at the sig for the statement of truth or lack of it)

[Mrs O'Frog]

8 hours ago, dx100uk said:

no 19th sept

 

dx

 

dx - should that be August?

 

Oh and Karalius - the 33 days includes EVERY day - weekends, bank holidays, even your dog's birthday.

Edited August 8, 2019 by Mrs O'Frog
Note to K added

[dx100uk]

yea august silly me.

 

[Karalius]

Thank you all, I appreciate the help. I will start reading and looking at my case more deeply, then start building up the defence. 

 

Thank you for the valid points Eric. Should this defence be submitted last day before the due date (18th August) or advisable to do so earlier? 

 

Many thanks and I will post my defence for review once I have collected all the evidence and read up more on it. 

[ericsbrother]

Have you snet CEL a CPR 31.14 request for documents?

If you havent then it wont matter when you submit the outline defence. the idea of waiting until the last knockings is to give time for them to respond and then use the lack of response against them.

If you have you dont delay beyond the time you can submit your defence just to wait for them to do or not do something

[Karalius]

Yes have sent it on the same day as DX suggested, 22nd of July. 

[ericsbrother]

nOk, so whe you submit your outline defence you add the point

 

the defendant does not believe the claimant has locus standi in this matter as they have failed to show  an assignment from the landowner to them to enter into contracts with the public and to make civil claims in their own name and likewise the necessary planning consent for their signage and equipment as required under the Town and Country Planning Act 2007 and  these also  being requisites the BPA Code of Practice.

 

they will have responded if they were going to so safe to sub ,it your defence points.

 

Post them up here before you actually submit them, we might want to suggest tweaks

[Karalius]

Good morning all,

 

I have wrote out a defence points and added the points as suggested by Eric. Can someone please review and advise if this is good enough. I will then post this on Sunday 18th before the deadline. The only thing I'm worried about adding the point 1.4 is that there is a sign below CEL that says "Connaught customers please register your vehicle at the reception desk to avoid a parking fine", but I guess this point is not valid and does not come together with the contract signs. 

 

Looking forward to your thoughts.

 

Best wishes

 

1.       Order dismissing the Claim

1.1 I request that the court use its management powers to dismiss the claim, as claim by the Claimant has no merit by its own violation, as particulars of claim are inadequate to determine what is being claimed and why action has been taken against the defendant as there no keeper liability in this matter and I were not the driver at the time. The claim is abuse of Civil Procedure

1.2 Inadequate signage – signage is not compliant with POFA/ATA CoP so no contract can be performed by the claimant. I could not have accepted contractual obligation and also the amount claimed then becomes a penalty as it is clearly there to act as deterrent and not a genuine offer to park

1.3 The amount claimed is different from the contractual sum if indeed the contract was offered to anyone. Refer to POFA para 9(2) and the amount being greater than the amount specified at the time

1.4 Hotel refused to give permit so no contract can be formed

1.5 The defendant does not believe the claimant has locus standi in this matter as they have failed to show an assignment from the landowner to them to enter into contracts with the public and to make civil claims in their own name and likewise the necessary planning consent for their signage and equipment as required under the Town and Country Planning Act 2007 and these also being requisites the BPA Code of Practice.

[AndyOrch]

Is that a Defence or a Draft Order ?

 

Looks like a draft order as per your heading and cannot be considered as a CPR compliant defence ?

 

Andy

[Karalius]

It's supposed to be defence, but as Eric suggested that I should mentioned the court to dismiss the claim I have added "order to dismiss the claim". 

 

I am sorry, but I have ever only wrote the defence out once in my life time and not very knowledgeable about the courts. 

[Mrs O'Frog]

So lose the "Order", just put in your defence that you request or invite the court to dismiss under their powers ....... and cite what they are and why.

 

Volition not violation.

 

Check for missing words and grammar ("as there no keeper liability", "I were not the driver" for starters)

 

in 1.2 you out yourself as the driver?

 

in 1.3 you say refer POFA, but in 1.1 you say no keeper liability - I assume for POFA fails? They won't be digging out POFA at this stage so no good telling them to refer, you state that they have failed to meet the conditions therefore no keeper liability. Did they just say you were driver or keeper in the poc (save me looking back)? If so there's something for you to jump on.

 

1.5 Point out that you asked for these in your CPR 31.14 and they did not respond/refused to provide (as applicable).

[Karalius]

Hi O'Frog, thanks for above. I have slightly polished and changed the wording on the defence, may you please review and advise if this is ok? 

 

Would I be right citing that the court use it's management powers under Rule 3.1 to dismiss this claim? 

 

1.2 I was not the driver. So, should I remove the part "I could not have accepted contractual obligation and also the amount claimed then becomes a penalty as it is clearly there to act as deterrent and not a genuine offer to park" and leave it only as "Inadequate signage – signage is not compliant with POFA/ATA CoP so no contract can be performed by the claimant"? 

 

1.3 In POC it does not state if I was the driver or the keeper. It states "Claim for monies relating to a Parking Charge for parking in a private car park managed by the Claimant in breach of the terms + conditions (T+Cs)."

 

 

1 DEFENCE

1.1 I request that the court use its management powers under rule 3.1 to dismiss the claim, as claim by the Claimant has no merit by its own volition, as particulars of claim are inadequate to determine what is being claimed and why action has been taken against the defendant as there is no keeper liability in this matter. The claim is abuse of Civil Procedure

1.2 Inadequate signage – signage is not compliant with POFA/ATA CoP so no contract can be performed by the claimant.

1.3 The claimant has failed to meet the conditions, therefore there is no keeper liability in this matter

1.4 Hotel refused to give permit so no contract can be formed

1.5 The defendant does not believe the claimant has locus standi in this matter as they have failed to show an assignment from the landowner to them to enter into contracts with the public and to make civil claims in their own name and likewise the necessary planning consent for their signage and equipment as required under the Town and Country Planning Act 2007 and these also being requisites the BPA Code of Practice. Claimant has failed to respond and provide proof under CPR 31.14 request.

 

 

 

[ericsbrother]

No, you add this at the bottom of your defence and that will be the usual short one of  The claimant has failed to identify the driver at the time and as they do not rely upon the POFA to create a keeper liability there is no cause for action against the defendantas they were not the driver at the time

in any case no contract offered by the claimany by way of signage at the site so therefore no breach of contract

The you can say the signage is prohibitive in nature, not a genuine offer of parking terms

the you state you dont believe they have locus standi in this matter as they have failed to show sight of a contract with the landowner  that assigns the right to enter into contracts with the public and to make civil claims in their own name as per a CPR 31.14 request.

and then you put the bit about their crap POC and ask for the courts to dismiss using their powers under CPR 3.4

 

 

what i wouldnt say is the hotel refused to give you a permit. You do not mention anything about who was there or driving or why they were at the place. It might be needed later but only in response to their witness statement as you are not going to drop your missus in the mire as they may well stop thsi claim adn start a new one against her

[Karalius]

Eric, many thanks for taking your time to write this out. I agree about not mentioning my partner. Stupid for suggesting that the hotel refused to give permit as it would then make me a keeper at the time. 

 

Can you please advise if I am right that specifically paragraph 5 of POFA is where CEL fails to identify me as the driver? 

 

Right, I have copied and retyped everything. I believe this makes sense to me if I were to be questioned in the court. Does this seem ok? 

 

1. DEFENCE

 

1.1 The Claimant has failed to identify the driver at the time as they do not rely upon the POFA to create a keeper liability and there is no cause for action against the defendant as they were not the driver at the time.

 

1.2 In any case no contract offered by the claimant by way of signage at the site so therefore no breach of contract.

 

1.3 The signage is prohibitive in nature and not a genuine offer of parking terms.

 

1.4 The defendant does not believe the claimant has locus standi in this matter as they have failed to show sight of a contract with the landowner that assigns the right to enter into contracts with the public and to make civil claims in their own name as per CPR 31.14 request sent on 22^nd of July 2019.

 

1.5 I invite that the court use its management powers under CPR 3.4 to dismiss the claim, as claim by the Claimant has no merit by its own volition, as particulars of claim are so poor and inadequate to determine what is being claimed and why action has been taken against the defendant as there is no keeper liability in this matter. The claim is abuse of Civil Procedure

 

[Gick]

1.1 The Claimant has failed to identify the driver at the time and as they do not rely upon the POFA to create a keeper liability,  there is no cause for action against the defendant who was not the driver at the time.

 

Suggest the above which I think is what you were wishing to say.

Edited August 15, 2019 by Gick
grammer

[brassnecked]

That's more like it Gick, covers the basis and allows Karalius expansion at WS stage, Less is more atm,

[ericsbrother]

the last bit is not part of your defence so no number for the paragraph wanted.

It is a request, if it was your defence they will send you a N244 and demand £255 for reading it.

Please try and follow what people are trying to tell you very carefully

[Karalius]

Thank you everyone for chipping in with remarks and advise. I understand your message Eric, my apologies I will take that in consideration. I am not being arrogant here, just haven't had experience in dealing with many of these situations, especially the courts. 

 

Should I have this defence posted now or wait till Sunday 18th before the deadline of Monday 19th August? 

 

Thanks 

[ericsbrother]

post it now.

 

[dx100uk]

on mcol website

 

dx

[ericsbrother]

copy to CEL by post

[Karalius]

Thanks both, I will do that right now on MCOL website. Eric, just to clarify this should be also sent to CEL via post? If so, registered post/to be signed for or just normal first class and keep receipt?

Edited August 16, 2019 by Karalius
Made mistake

[ericsbrother]

ordinary post.

read up on service of documents and you will then realise that a letter is deemed delivered 2 working days after it is posted. We suggest that you get a POP receipt at the post office just in case but your service is just a courtesy as they can read it online and the law says they ahve even if they cant be bothered to as they used the onlne court claims system

[Karalius]

Thank you, I will look it over when I get home from work. I have posted the defence on MCOL and also to CEL directly

 

Have a great weekend guys! I appreciate all the help this community has provided, and I mean that! Without you all I would have definitely bowed to these cowboys and paid up! 

[Karalius]

Hello guys,

 

Hoping all is well, please can someone give me advise. 

 

I have just returned from holidays today 21 sept - 8th Oct. I had found letter from courts served on day I left request to complete form N180 by 8th of October (today). 

 

How big problem will this cause me if I do not send this out until tomorrow, or do I even need to now?

 

A1 - should the answer be yes?

D1 - how should I choose the court that I want? can I just put one down that is close to my work for example? 

 

 

Thanks

 

 

Scannable_Document_on_8_Oct_2019_at_22_09_59.pdf