Show Posts - gogo184

I have attempted to draft my witness statement. My main arguments are:1. Incomplete PoC2. No signage on when car was parked, hence no evidence to support claim3. They are claiming sign was near but not at that spot4. Incomplete signages as their site plan shows full row of restricted parking but only 4 pillars out of more than 10 pillars show a sign. My car parked spot did not have a sign.5. Multiple discrepancies in the evidence - parking sign in evidence is different than the actual sign at the site (included in my exhibit)6. Discrepancies in their appeal time limit advise - NTK said 28 days for appeal but when my appeal rejection email said 21 days (both evidences in as part of claimant witness statement)7. failure to prove landownership authority, there is a mention of Excel Parking Ltd but no records on this company in companies house8. I am saying it's false claim because there was no sign, they don't have any evidence of that hence there wasn't any breach. Can someone please kindly do a sanity check of my witness statement, and advise and feedback if I am missing something. Thanks a lot. Photo evidence in my exhibit - Defendant ExhibitAlso, regarding timelines, hearing is scheduled for 30th Jan so I need to submit my witness statement by 16th Jan, right? And what is the best way to submit my statement?Many thanks for your help. I, [Defendant’s Full Name], am the Defendant in this claim and make this statement in support of my defence. The facts in this statement are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.Multiple Procedural Defects in the Claimant’s Case2. The Claimant’s Particulars of Claim (PoC) and Witness Statement (WS) are both procedurally defective and should be given no weight due to their failure to comply with the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) and the improper execution of their statements of truth.3. The PoC fail to comply with CPR 16.4 and Practice Direction 16, paragraph 7.5. The Claimant had an obligation to fully particularise the claim at the time of issuing proceedings but failed to:a) Set out the exact wording of the clause(s) of the terms and conditions relied upon.(b) Adequately explain how the terms of the alleged contract were incorporated or why I am said to be in breach.(c) Provide a breakdown of how the total sum claimed has been calculated, including interest and alleged additional charges.(d) Provide Parking Charge Notice number as claimed by Claimant in Witness Statement paragraph 12.4. Despite the Claimant’s failure to adequately plead its case, the allocation judge did not order the Claimant to amend or clarify its PoC. The Claimant has since sought to introduce additional details via its Witness Statement, but this does not cure the defective PoC. A Witness Statement cannot remedy an inadequate statement of case, and this attempt to rectify procedural failings at a later stage is an abuse of process.5. The PoC are signed by Edmund Shoreman-Lawson, described as the "Claimant’s legal representative," but there is no evidence that he is a solicitor or that he has the formal authorisation required under CPR 22.1 and Practice Direction 22 to sign a statement of truth on behalf of the Claimant.6. CPR 22.1(6) and PD 22, paragraph 3.9, require that:(a) If signed by a legal representative, they must be a solicitor or a person formally authorised by the Claimant.(b) The signatory must be responsible for the conduct of the case.7. Edmund Shoreman-Lawson is not a solicitor, and the Claimant has not provided evidence that he has explicit authorisation to sign statements of truth on behalf of Excel Parking Services Ltd. The Claimant must demonstrate that he has the required formal standing to sign the PoC. If he does not, the statement of truth is defective, and the PoC are procedurally invalid.8. The Witness Statement attempts to introduce new arguments and details that were absent from the PoC, including references to site plan, signage, and contract terms. However, this does not remedy the defective PoC and is an attempt to circumvent proper procedure.9. Claimant has included parking signage as part of exhibit JB1 but this signage is different than the one displayed at the site. I include a photo from the site where these contract terms are not mentioned. This is a clear false representation by providing false evidence and attempt to abuse the process.10. The Witness Statement falsely states that PoC includes Parking Charge Notice number but it doesn’t. Claimant is making a false statement regarding that in Witness Statement.11. Claimant’s Witness Statement fails to confirm which  accredited trade associations (ATAs) they are a member of. Witness Statement just mentions they are Accredited Member of Approved Trade Associations certified by the Driverand Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) but fails to establish which ATA.12. The Claimant is a serial litigant represented by bulk litigation solicitors and should be fully aware of its obligations under the CPR. Despite this, it failed to properly plead its case at the outset and now seeks to correct its failings by introducing details at a later stage. This approach is unfair, unreasonable, and an abuse of process.13. In light of these procedural defects, I submit that:(a) The PoC are inadequately pleaded, do not comply with CPR 16.4, and should be struck out under CPR 3.4(2)(a) as disclosing no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim.(b) The statement of truth on the PoC is defective, as the Claimant has not demonstrated that Edmund Shoreman-Lawson was properly authorised to sign on their behalf.(c) The Witness Statement should be given no weight, as it does not correct the failings in the PoC.(d) The court should consider whether the Claimant’s conduct in issuing vague claims and relying on late evidence constitutes unreasonable behaviour, warranting a costs order under CPR 27.14(2)(g).The Claimant’s Failure to Display Compliant Signage14. The Claimant’s Witness Statement at various paragraphs states that claimant was prominently displaying parking restriction signs, however that’s not the case as I have included evidence in Exhibit 1.15. Defendant’s Witness Statement Exhibit 1 shows photographic evidence of the site, that clearly show signage was displayed randomly and not fully on all the parking spots where restriction was applied16. On that particular row of parking spots, there are more than 10 pillars but signage is displayed on only 4. That shows Claimant’s complete failure of showing proper signage, and misleading drivers by not showing the signage but then issuing parking charge notices and abusing the procedure.17. Claimant has failed to display complaint signage for all the parking spots where restriction was applied. This shows a misleading practice and not compliant with consumer practices. 18. The Claimant’s evidential photos of signage at the location, found in Exhibit 2 of their Witness Statement, predominantly depict signs on that adjacent pillar where Defendant car was not parked. 19. The Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of signage where the defendant car was parked. The Claimant’s own exhibits and witness statement paragraph 19 claims that a sign was displayed “near” the defendant’s parked car, and not at the exact parking spot.20. The Claimant’s such fundamental failure and further providing false statements and evidence in the Witness Statement shows an abuse of process, and falsely claiming that contract breach has occurred without providing relevant evidence to support their claim.21. This is further evidence of non-compliance with the industry Code of Practice, "Signs must be conspicuous and legible, and written in intelligible language, so that they are easy to see, read and understand."The Claimant’s Unlawful Access to DVLA Data22. The Claimant’s Witness Statement at paragraph 3 asserts Accredited Member of Approved Trade Associations but fails to confirm which ATA. Since compliance with the Code of Practice is essential for the Claimant to obtain Registered Keeper details from the DVLA under Regulation 27 of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002. Without their confirmation of which ATA they are member of, their access of DVLA data would seem unlawful.23. As already established in this Witness Statement, the Claimant does not confirm which ATA they are a member of, this strict compliance with the Code of Practice can not be established and is a fundamental condition of the Keeper At Date Of Event (KADOE) contract between private parking operators and the DVLA, the Claimant’s access to DVLA data is unlawful.24. The KADOE contract explicitly states that an operator must adhere to the ATA Code of Practice in its entirety as a condition of being granted access to Registered Keeper data. Any failure to meet the requirements of the Code, including but not limited to inadequate signage, misleading contractual terms, or procedural breaches, invalidates an operator’s lawful basis for requesting and processing keeper details from the DVLA.25.As such, the Claimant has unlawfully accessed my data in contravention of the KADOE contract, which constitutes a breach of the Data Protection Act 2018 and UK GDPR, as it obtained and processed my personal data without a lawful basis.The Claimant’s Failure to Prove Landowner Authority26. The Claimant’s Witness Statement does not confirm whether they have a valid contract with the landowner authorising them to issue Parking Charge Notices (PCNs). However, the contract statement of authority provided in their Exhibit JB2 is so confusing that it is meaningless and constitutes a clear abuse of process.27. The document shows the site is leased to Excel Parking Ltd but does not confirm what is the role of Excel Parking Ltd. Further, Excel Parking Ltd company doesn’t have any records in Companies House. Without this key information, the Claimant has provided no admissible evidence that they have landowner authority, which is a fundamental requirement for bringing this claim.28. The document states that Excel Parking Services Ltd are the operator, however if the site is leased to Excel Parking Ltd (as per 2nd point) then document fails to show the relationship between Excel Parking Services Ltd and Excel Parking Ltd. Moreover Excel Parking Ltd doesn’t seem to exist as there are no records of this company ever formed or dissolved in Companies House.29. This document fails to establish who is the land owner and who is the operator, which is a failure to prove landowner authority.30. A parking operator must have clear landowner authority to issue and enforce parking charges. This was confirmed in ParkingEye Ltd v Somerfield Stores Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 1338, where the Court of Appeal emphasised that authority must be demonstrated through an unambiguous contract. The Claimant’s contract is so confusing that it is impossible to verify whether they have such authority.31. The contract does not allow the Defendant or the court to verify that the Claimant has the right to operate at the site, issue charges, or pursue legal action in its own name. The Claimant’s failure to provide a clear contract means there is no proof that they were authorised to act at the time of the alleged contravention.32. Given that the Claimant has failed to comply with CPR 31.6, Practice Direction 16, paragraph 7.5, and established case law, I submit that this claim should be dismissed due to the Claimant’s failure to provide fundamental evidence of their authority.33. In light of the above, I submit that the Claimant has failed to establish that it has landowner authority, has engaged in procedural misconduct, and that this claim should be dismissed in its entirety.No Contract Was Formed Due to Signage 34. I deny the Claimant’s assertions in paragraphs 5 to 22 of their Witness Statement regarding the alleged contract. They failed to display proper signage and have no evidence of alleged contract breach.35. The fundamental basis of a contract is mutual agreement, which requires a clear offer and unambiguous acceptance. Given that the signage was not displayed where defendant’s car was parked and claimant failed to properly display signage, no legally binding agreement could have been formed.36. The Claimant has provided no evidence that the signage was displayed where defendant’s car was parked. Without proof that a valid contract was entered into, the claim cannot succeed.The Claimant’s Attempt to Justify False Claim via the Witness Statement37. The Claimant’s Witness Statement in paragraph 12 states that Parking Charge Notice number was included in PoC but it’s not, it’s false claim by Claimant’s witness.38. Claimant’s Witness Statement paragraphs 13, Claimant has used my appeal contents to identify me as a driver but they failed to understand the reasoning behind my appeal. I appealed in good faith (but late by 3 days of 28days limit) because there was no contract breach as signage was not properly displayed. 39. But Claimant failed to engage with my appeal and provide any reasonable justification and rejected the appeal just on the basis that it missed the deadline of 28 days. 40. Further to note that Claimant’s Notice To Keeper (NTK) mentions that all appeals/challenges must be registered within 28 days beginning with the day after the issue date of this Notice. But PoFA Schedule 4, Paragraph 9(6) then defines when a notice is "given." A notice sent by post is presumed to have been delivered on the second working day after it was posted, unless the contrary is proved. For these purposes, a "working day" excludes Saturdays, Sundays, and public holidays in England and Wales. Claimant are using the day after the issue date which is against the PoFA Schedule 4, Paragraph 9(6). As per the PoFA it should be second working day after it was posted.41. Further to add, when Claimant rejected defendant’s appeal they mentioned appeals should have been registered within 21 days. This is in clear contradiction of claimant’s own advice in NTK, where appeal time limit is 28 days.42. This contradiction between 2 documents (submitted by Claimant in exhibit JB1 and JB2) clearly shows Claimant’s misguided advise and misrepresentation of the claim case. 43. Claimant argues in Witness Statement paragraphs 19 , that signage are displayed near the defendant’s vehicle but there was no signage where defendant vehicle was parked and Claimant has not produced any evidence to support their claim.44. Claimant asserts in Witness Statement paragraphs 20, “there are no other sign visible and therefore no indication that any alternative terms may be applied in this area ”, however there was no sign at all at the defendant’s parking spot. Claimant has failed to display signs prominently and relying on a sign nearby to bring a false case against defendant. 45.  Claimant asserts in Witness Statement paragraphs 21, that defendant should have utilised helpline number to clarify but it’s claimant’s duty and responsibility as a parking operator to clearly and prominently display all the signages and not engage in bringing forward false claims when there is no contract breach. 46.  Claimant falsely asserts in Witness Statement paragraphs 22 that I claimed I did not see the signage. My argument is there was no signage, this is a failure on claimant’s side where they have failed to properly display the signage. Further claimant has included a site plan with the witness statement, but this site plan is not displayed at the site itself. 47. The Claimant attempts to justify the inadequacy of their PoC by referring to Practice Direction 7C, Section 5.2(1) and 5.2A. However, while these rules permit brief particulars of claim in money claims, they do not absolve the Claimant of the obligation to provide sufficient detail under CPR 16.4. The Claimant had the opportunity to submit Further and Better Particulars but chose not to do so. A defective PoC cannot be retrospectively rectified through a Witness Statement.Conclusion: The Claim Should Be Dismissed48. The Claimant has made numerous procedural defects, failed to establish landowner authority, has made false statements, has provided misguided advises, has submitted vague and defective Particulars of Claim, has attempted to circumvent proper procedure by relying on a Witness Statement to introduce new arguments, and has sought to bring a false claim forward without any evidence, which seems to be an abuse of process.49. Given the serious procedural defects, misrepresentations, and abuse of process in this case, I respectfully request that the claim be dismissed in its entirety.

Thank you. I have had a search here for Witness Statement and seeing some making me nervous. They are so detailed out with keen focus on legal wordings, something I am not familiar with. I will attempt to prepare my statement along those lines but can I come back here for review and feedback please? Also, I was reviewing the land contract they have sent (page 43 in Exhibit JB2 file).Exhibit JB2 Contract is on Excel Parking Services Limited letterhead, so they seem to be the land owner. Point 2 says site is leased to Excel Parking Ltd (a different company). Point 3 says Excel Parking Services Limited are the operator and exercise same rights as the landowner. So my questions are:1. Who is the landowner? Excel Parking Services Limited or someone else?2. If Excel Parking Services Limited are the landowner, then why it is leased to another company Excel Parking Ltd?3. As per 3rd point Excel Parking Services Limited are the operator, so they are the landowner and operator both? 4. What's Excel Parking Ltd role here? And this company doesn't exist as per companies house. 5. Only Excel Parking Services Limited is active as per companies house and Excel Parking Ltd doesn't have any record (not even dissolved)Am I right in questioning the landowner authority letter and it's indeed ambiguous? Thank you.

Hi,Can you help please? Can you advise with the next steps please?Many Thanks

I have now scanned everything and added in the G drive folder.Legal PackFiles are sorted with categories, including page numbers in the file name.There is no cover letter. Total 57 pages in the pack, and one "With Compliments" slip. Document pack starts with copy of Claim form (1st page)Mostly documents are copies of claim form, N180, court notices, PCN reminders, photographic evidences.I also noticed my name is misspelled on the exhibit JB1 and JB2 heading pages defendant row i.e. page 38 and 42. Would that help in any way? Land contract to issue PCN is in exhibit JB2 file, page number 43.Thank you.

I have scanned key documents - witness statement, copy of my appeal, and exhibit JB1 - with personal details redacted and have put them on g drive. Witness Statement (WS)My AppealExhibit JB1Key highlights I noticed:1. WS point 5 and 6 - claiming prominently displaying the signages but they were not. Parking restriction signage was on the adjacent pillar (only on that pillar) and not on the pillar driver parked. They might think that one signage covers the entire row but it would be quite confusing to the user.2. WS point 6 - included a site plan but that site plan was not displayed in the parking site i.e. not visible3. WS points 13, 19, 20, 21, 22 - using my appeal against the defendant. 4. WS point 19 - mentioning that parking restriction sign was displayed "near" where defendant parked car. It's not exactly sign was displayed where car was parked. It was near. And that's seen in the photographs also. They do not have any photograph of the sign displayed on that pillar where car was parked. It's only on the adjacent pillar only. I am not sure whether this will hold any value in my defence but one can argue the sign was "near", and not exactly at the spot. "Claimant would note that the sign showing that parking is restricted to E-Permit holders only can be seen in the contravention photographs taken when the parking charge was issued, near where the Defendant had parked their vehicle and therefore would have been visible to the Defendant."Please help with my response and way forward. Do I need to submit my statement to the courts before the hearing OR I need to make the statement at the hearing? Hearing is scheduled for 30th Jan. Regards 

They are pursuing the case further. I have got the a document pack in post from them. It contains lots of documents - photographic evidences, all the reminders, a defence statement, site plan of restrictive parking (this site plan is not displayed at the parking) etc. They have also included my appeal (I identified as the driver) which I sent earlier before the legal proceedings, and I think that's my mistake. They have used contents of my appeal in the defence statement. What are the next steps for me? Is there any hope for me or it's a gone case?What part of the legal pack I should share here to help prepare my response?Thanks and Happy New Year.

Quote from: DWMB2 on 03 Oct, 2025 14:44Worth showing us a copy just to check there's nothing untoward on there that you might have missed.Quote from: b789 on 03 Oct, 2025 14:53All standard stuff. You can bet that DCB Legal will discontinue just before the deadline for them to pay the £27 trial fee. Nothing else for you to do now unless you receive a copy of a Witness Statement (WS) from DCB Legal (unlikely), in which case we would need to see it and would advise on how to produce your own.AS requested above, please show a copy of the Notice of Allocation with all the order points, just incase there is something out of the ordinary.Sorry, I should have shared earlier. Here is the G drive link. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WSIYFHWrc6Tshv55paP3gabV_3ncpFvi/view?usp=drive_linkI couldn't find the attachment option (I did it few months back but looks like there has been a change on the forum). Anyways searched and found the guidelines hence put it up on the drive. Hope it works and you are able to access it.Let me know if you can't then will find another solution. Thanks a lot.

Hello guys,Thanks for your all the support so far dealing with this case. I attended the mediation call and rejected the mediation offer (they asked for £200). I then received a "Notice of Transfer of Proceedings" from CNBC to local County Court. Today I received a "Notice of Allocation to the Small Claims Track (Hearing)", hearing is provisionally scheduled for January 2026 at local county court. There seems to be standard directions in this letter, with a note that claimant has to pay the Trial fee to court by 02nd January. All other points seem to be standard. What is my next course of action? As per the letter I will be advised a day before whether the hearing is going ahead as planned or if there is any change. And also to submit copies of all documents and statements to all parties no later than 14 days before the hearing. How do I proceed now? What should I do? Would you need to see a copy of this notice OR it's a standard copy? Kind Regards 

Thank you very much. I have sent the N180 form to both the emails.

Quote from: DWMB2 on 09 Jul, 2025 18:231) You will receive an order in due course setting out when the hearing will be, and providing dates by which witness statements must be received, and the hearing fee must be paid. When DCB Legal are involved, they usually before this falls due.2) If you search on here for mediation/telephone mediation you'll find dozens of threads advising on this. The more other threads you're able to read, the better your understanding of the process. 3) No, you don't ignore it. You send it to the other parties (the claimant, Via their legal firm, and the court) as advised, using the email addresses provided.4) I'm not sure what you mean about your defence being 'checked'. This is a court claim... The only time anyone other than Excel/DCB Legal would look at your defence would be at the hearing, when the judge would do so. This being a claim managed by DCB Legal, it's very unlikely to get that far.5) When I get round to writing one, yes. In the meantime, other case threads are a good place to start. The Private Parking Forum on the MoneySavingExpert forums has a good guide in their 'Newbies' thread. Some of their advice differs from ours, but the court process is of course the same.Thank you again. Re my 3rd question, I actually got confused with the inclusion of DCB Legal email in the advice because this claim is not managed by DCB Legal, but by ELMS LEGAL LTD. That's why I asked the question whether to send it to other parties and how. Now I am clear - I send the questionnaire to info@elmslegal.co.uk, and not to the DCB legal email. Correct?Thanks

Quote from: jfollows on 09 Jul, 2025 16:18Standard advice here is:QuoteHaving received your own N180 (make sure it is not simply a copy of the claimants N180), do not use the paper form. Ignore all the other forms that came with it. you can discard those. Download your own here and fill it in on your computer. You sign it by simply typing your full name in the signature box.https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/673341e779e9143625613543/N180_1124.pdfHere are the answers to some of the less obvious questions:• The name of the court is "Civil National Business Centre".• To be completed by "Your full name" and you are the "Defendant".• C1: "YES"• D1: "NO". Reason: "I wish to question the Claimant about their evidence at a hearing in person and to expose omissions and any misleading or incorrect evidence or assertions.Given the Claimant is a firm who complete cut & paste parking case paperwork for a living, having this case heard solely on papers would appear to put the Claimant at an unfair advantage, especially as they would no doubt prefer the Defendant not to have the opportunity to expose the issues in the Claimants template submissions or speak as the only true witness to events in question.."• F1: Whichever is your nearest county court. Use this to find it: https://www.find-court-tribunal.service.gov.uk/search-option• F3: "1".• Sign the form by simply typing your full name for the signature.When you have completed the form, attach it to a single email addressed to both dq.cnbc@justice.gov.uk and info@dcblegal.co.uk and CC in yourself. Make sure that the claim number is in the subject field of the email.It’s far to soon in the process for anyone to consider your defence.Following this, the case will be allocated to your local court and the claimant will be given a deadline by which they must pay the court fee. Take serious note of this deadline, because if they don’t pay then the case will be vacated.You will also have a mandatory mediation session, at which you offer £0 and the session will end. By telephone.Thank you very much, its very much appreciated. Couple of quick questions if I may ask:1. How will I know claimant is given a deadline to pay court fee? Will I be informed of all the steps going forward?2. Re the mandatory mediation session, will this be with claimant solicitor and someone from Courts & Tribunal Service? Any guidelines for the mediation session and what would happen in that?3. In the notice I received, it is mentioned twice to serve copies of completed questionnaire to all other parties - first on the notice itself and then at the end of the paper form N180 "You must also send a copy of this form (N180 Directions questionnaire) to each of the other parties in this case". Do I ignore this? Just emailing to those 2 email addresses enough? 4. You saying its far too soon in the process for anyone to consider my defence so I am assuming this notice is a standard next step in the process when someone acknowledges/sends a defence response. Nobody has checked the defence response yet. When do you think that response usually gets checked in the process?5. Is there a standard process guidelines I can refer to understand the process and next steps?Kind Regards

Hi All, Thanks for your support so far for the defence response. I sent my defence response on 30th June and have got a "Notice of Proposed Allocation of the Small Claims Track" today in the post, dated 07th July 25. Asking to complete N180 Directions questionnaire (Small Claims Track) and send it back to court and serve copies on all other parties.Does this mean my defence has been rejected and claim is escalated?What are the next steps for me?Also noticed in the 1st point of notice, "copy of which is enclosed" is strike out (defence response is not attached with this notice).Any guidance on the next steps please and how should I complete the questionnaire? Thanks a lot. [ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Quote from: b789 on 12 Jun, 2025 14:30With an issue date of 5th June, you have until 4pm on Tuesday 24th June to submit your defence. If you submit an Acknowledgement of Service (AoS) before then, you would then have until 4pm on Tuesday 8th July to submit your defence.If you want to submit an AoS then follow the instructions in this linked PDF:https://www.dropbox.com/s/xvqu3bask5m0zir/money-claim-online-How-to-Acknowledge.pdf?dl=0Otherwise, here is the defence and link to the draft order that goes with it. You only need to edit your name and the claim number. You sign the defence by typing your full name for the signature and date it. There is nothing to edit in the draft order.When you're ready you combine both documents as a single PDF attachment and send as an attachment in an email to claimresponses.cnbc@justice.gov.uk and CC in yourself. The claim number must be in the email subject field and in the body of the email just put: "Please find attached the defence and draft order in the matter of Excel Parking Services Ltd v [your full name] Claim no.: [claim number]."QuoteIN THE COUNTY COURTClaim No: [Claim Number]BETWEEN:Excel Parking Services LtdClaimant- and -[Defendant's Full Name]
DefendantDEFENCE1. The Defendant denies the claim in its entirety. The Defendant asserts that there is no liability to the Claimant and that no debt is owed. The claim is without merit and does not adequately disclose any comprehensible cause of action.2. There is a lack of precise detail in the Particulars of Claim (PoC) in respect of the factual and legal allegations made against the Defendant such that the PoC do not comply with CPR 16.4.3. The Defendant is unable to plead properly to the PoC because:(a) The contract referred to is not detailed or attached to the PoC in accordance with CPR PD 16(7.5);(b) The PoC do not state the exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions of the contract (or contracts) which is/are relied on;(c) The PoC do not adequately set out the reason (or reasons) why the claimant asserts the defendant has breached the contract (or contracts)(d) The PoC do not state with sufficient particularity exactly where the breach occurred, the exact time when the breach occurred and how long it is alleged that the vehicle was parked before the parking charge was allegedly incurred;(e) The PoC do not state precisely how the sum claimed is calculated, including the basis for any statutory interest, damages, or other charges;(f) The PoC do not state what proportion of the claim is the parking charge and what proportion is damages;(g) The PoC do not provide clarity on whether the Defendant is sued as the driver or the keeper of the vehicle, as the claimant cannot plead alternative causes of action without specificity.4. The Defendant attaches to this defence a copy of a draft order approved by a district judge at another court. The court struck out the claim of its own initiative after determining that the Particulars of Claim failed to comply with CPR 16.4. The judge noted that the claimant had failed to:(i) Set out the exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions relied upon;(ii) Adequately explain the reasons why the defendant was allegedly in breach of contract;(iii) Provide separate, detailed Particulars of Claim as permitted under CPR PD 7C.5.2(2).(iv) The court further observed that, given the modest sum claimed, requiring further case management steps would be disproportionate and contrary to the overriding objective. Accordingly, the judge struck out the claim outright rather than permitting an amendment.5. The Defendant submits that the same reasoning applies in this case and invites the court to adopt a similar approach by striking out the claim for the Claimant’s failure to comply with CPR 16.4.Statement of truthI believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.Signed:Date:Draft Order for the defenceThank you very much. This is great, appreciate your help.One quick question - I send this defence via email and not submit on the moneyclaim portal? Regards

Here we go. Apologies for not sending the whole earlier. [ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Quote from: DWMB2 on 12 Jun, 2025 12:39Are Excel using external solicitors (if so, who?) or running the claim themselves?Sorry I thought that wasn't important and did not include in the snapshot. They are using external solicitors. Attached is that part of the claim form. ELMS LEGAL LTD31 HANDLEY STREETSLEAFORDLINCOLNSHIRENG34 7TQ [ Guests cannot view attachments ]