PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Reply to defence not served on me, Reply to defence not served on me
NGR
post Tue, 12 Jun 2018 - 15:52
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18
Joined: 28 Jun 2005
Member No.: 3,279



All,
Apologies if covered already but an interesting development in an ongoing claim from a parking co and solicitor of questionable morals.

Essentially, my defence went in, filed and copy to all parties as expected some months ago. I phoned the court to check if a reply to my defence had been filed with them and lo and behold, it has! However, I have received no copy myself (I got the N180 from the Claimant/Solicitor). CPR rules say that all parties should be served a copy of the reply and it was filed at court a month ago so not simply still 'in the post'. Does this sound like an attempt to disadvantage me? More importantly, I intend to bring it up in the hearing (as well as other failures of the Claimant's Solicitor to follow PAP and CPR 31:14 etc...) Any good way to make the most of it (apart from whinge at the SRA)?



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Tue, 12 Jun 2018 - 15:52
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
kommando
post Tue, 12 Jun 2018 - 16:03
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,940
Joined: 6 Oct 2012
Member No.: 57,558



QUOTE
Does this sound like an attempt to disadvantage me?
Yes

QUOTE
More importantly, I intend to bring it up in the hearing (as well as other failures of the Claimant's Solicitor to follow PAP and CPR 31:14 etc...) Any good way to make the most of it (apart from whinge at the SRA)?
It might help with the Judge but they seem to allow PPC's to run rings around the procedures. Doubt it would trouble the SRA as no doubt it will been lost in the post cough cough.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Tue, 12 Jun 2018 - 16:34
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7,763
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



So ask for a copy of that reply as non has been received and a letter to the court NOW noting the fact and asking that the hearing be put on hold, at the claimants cost, until siuch time as they comply
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Tue, 12 Jun 2018 - 17:10
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,638
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



Have you completed and sent your own N180 ?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NGR
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 07:47
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18
Joined: 28 Jun 2005
Member No.: 3,279



QUOTE (ostell @ Tue, 12 Jun 2018 - 17:34) *
So ask for a copy of that reply as non has been received and a letter to the court NOW noting the fact and asking that the hearing be put on hold, at the claimants cost, until siuch time as they comply


Thank for the replies guys. My n180 went in well on time I'm on top of the paperwork.
Still trying to establish if they have sent a reply (Court staff may be a little confused there's a counterclaim involved)

The hearing is months away, would you expect a reply to my defence to arrive last thing (ie 14 days before) then rent-a-rep turns up and has a script to work from?


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 08:36
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,198
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



There is no "reply to your defence"
They have a WItness statement and claim bundle, thats likely to turn up 14 days before

What did you get as a response to counterclaim? they had 14 days to get that to you, if not move for default.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
henrik777
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 09:36
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,625
Joined: 16 Nov 2008
Member No.: 24,123



QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 09:36) *
There is no "reply to your defence"
They have a WItness statement and claim bundle, thats likely to turn up 14 days before

What did you get as a response to counterclaim? they had 14 days to get that to you, if not move for default.




https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure...les/part16#16.7
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 09:55
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7,763
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



The lack of response to the counter claim is interesting, if indeed a counter claim has been raised. You now have the chance to get a default judgement against them.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NGR
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 10:07
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18
Joined: 28 Jun 2005
Member No.: 3,279



Reply to defence is optional but if filed must be served on all parties (cpr 16.7). I expect they will just go with witness statement though.

The reply to my counterclaim was pretty much a one liner, interestingly it contradicts earlier statements from the ppc!

This post has been edited by NGR: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 10:08
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 12:49
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,198
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



I hope thats in your WS / Skeleton Argument!
Ask which VERiFIED BY A STATEMENT OF TruTH do we believe? lol
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 13:20
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 39,190
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



If their defence to your counterclaim is as poor as you suggest you can request its struckout and then you have the chance to win by default.


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NGR
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 13:49
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18
Joined: 28 Jun 2005
Member No.: 3,279



My witness statement hasn't gone in yet, not due for some months but will draw attention to the contradictions.

Rookie, interesting point about getting their defence to counterclaim struck out by default. I had thought of that but, if successful, would that kill their initial claim as well?

My rationale for holding on until the hearing is to explain to the DJ in person how stupid their defence is and push for costs and damages.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 14:13
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,198
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Of course it wont, as theyre seperate.
Damages is your counterclaim... and you wont get more costs unless you can show theyre unreasonable
Can you show us their reply?

If you get to a hearing abou tthe claim and theyve already lost your counterclaim, it wont look that great for them...

This post has been edited by nosferatu1001: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 14:14
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 14:36
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,638
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



Doesn't the OP have to pay for a strike-out ?

If so, does he automatically recover the fee if successful ?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 15:55
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,198
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



I think yiu have to apply so that's £100 as no hearing needed, but you'd ask that the cost of application is a cost of the counter claim and added to the award
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NGR
post Wed, 13 Jun 2018 - 18:20
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18
Joined: 28 Jun 2005
Member No.: 3,279



I don't mind throwing £100 at it if needed.

Apart from the usual case number, claimant, defendant details and statement, their defence to my Counterclaim is three lines (alright, I lied, it's more than one!),

First line is admitting they accessed the DVLA for Keeper's details (couldn't really deny that one)

Second line is the one of any substance (or lack of):
It is denied the Claimant had no reasonable grounds to request the Defendant's details from the DVLA. The Claimant had reasonable grounds to request the information pursuant to schedule 4 (1) of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012: "The Creditor has the right to recover any unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle"


Third line is the usual BS to strike out under 3.4(2)(a)


I'm counterclaiming for DPA breach/hassle/inconvenience/stress/use of personal data etc.
So they want to defend my counterclaim solely on PoFA, nothing else, not a sausage...

I was not the driver but am the keeper, the docs from the PPC (NTK etc...) are timely but not PoFA compliant, LBC was sparse and I told them to sort out a proper PAP compliant version which they couldn't be arsed doing.

Roughly one third of my defence points out where they are not compliant with PoFA and therefore can't hold the Keeper liable. Despite telling them this, they then want to defend based solely on PoFA!!

I was quite amazed at their defence, it doesn't mention anything such as photos, letters, transferring liability etc. etc.

Thoughts?




Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 05:42
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 39,190
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



The defence is legal points, it’s not a witness statement, they’ve covered the legal points just with no explanation.


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NGR
post Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 07:58
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18
Joined: 28 Jun 2005
Member No.: 3,279



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 06:42) *
The defence is legal points, it’s not a witness statement, they’ve covered the legal points just with no explanation.


Yeah, understand that but relying on a single one-liner seems a little lame to me. Especially when I have a letter from the Claimant saying they don't use PoFA in the first place. I expect it will be easy to debunk their one single defence point.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 08:47
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,638
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



I expect it will be easy to debunk their one single defence point.

No it won't

A court has recently decided that a parking company has the right to obtain keeper details from the DVLA if it believes it's entitled to payment no matter how flimsy the reason for the belief

To debunk their defence you will have to show why they knew they had no reasonable cause eg :

The car wasn't there
They don't have a contract for the location
It's a public road
You identified the driver

Whether or not they rely on POFA is irrelevant
Parking companies only have to persuade the judge that the chances are better than 50:50 that the registered keeper was driving
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NGR
post Thu, 14 Jun 2018 - 09:27
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18
Joined: 28 Jun 2005
Member No.: 3,279



Do you have details of that case please? Would be interested to read up on it.

My logic is that they rely on pofa in their defence therfore they consider it relevant. Kadoe also requires pofa compliance, they are not pofa compliant (and admit that) therefore they couldn't have had reasonable cause.

Ps not playing devil's advocate, just want to run through possible scenarios ahead of the hearing.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Saturday, 18th August 2018 - 02:28
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.