Free Traffic Legal Advice

It would be better if you could please show us a copy of the claim form, including all dates, just redacting your name, address, and the MCOL password/ref number etc.

Use the guide to adding images with Imgur found here - READ THIS FIRST - Private Parking Charges Forum guide

It would also be useful to know if you have engaged in any previous correspondence either with the parking company (such as any appeal) or Moorside Legal. If so, it would be useful to see the contents of this.

What is the issue date of the claim? DO NOT redact any dates from anything you show us!!!

Any claim issued through the utter incompetents at Moorside Legal will either be struck out or discontinued, as long as you follow the advice given here.

So... date of the claim?

With an issue date of 3rd April, you had until 4pm on Tuesday 22nd April to submit your defence. If you had submitted an Acknowledgement of Service (AoS) before then, you would then have had until 4pm on Tuesday 6th May to submit your defence.

The claimant has now had over a week to request a CCJ by default and it is quite likely that you have one by now. I suggest you log into your MCOL and check the MCOL history. If you do not have a default CCJ, you must immediately submit the AoS as described below:

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=0

Fortunately, you are dealing with an otherwise firm of incompetent legal wannabes and there is a chance that they have not yet triggered the default CCJ. Once the AoS is submitted, they cannot trigger a CCJ by default until after the defence deadline, if no defence has been submitted.

Otherwise, here is the defence and link to the draft order and relevant transcripts that go 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 send all the documents as a single PDF attachment (in the order of 'defence', 'draft order' and then the 2 'transcripts') 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 UKPS Ltd v [your full name] Claim no.: [claim number]."

IN THE COUNTY COURT

Claim No: [Claim Number]

BETWEEN:

UKPS Ltd
Claimant

- and -

[Defendant's Full Name]

Defendant

---

DEFENCE

1. 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(1)(a).

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 cites the cases of CEL v Chan 2023 [E7GM9W44] and CPMS v Akande 2024 [K0DP5J30], which are persuasive appellate decisions. In these cases, claims were struck out due to identical failures to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a). Transcripts of these decisions are attached to this Defence.

5. 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.(1)(a). 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) Failed to 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.

6. 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(1)(a).

Statement of truth

I 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 defence

CEL v Chan Transcript

CPMS v Akande Transcript

If you want an editable MS Word file with everything in a single document which you can then save/export as a single PDF file when ready to send, use this:

MS Word .docx file for defence [CPR 16.4(1)(a)]

the car at the time was a lease, or more accurately a car subscription service.



There are only 2 legal entities who may be liable for a breach of contract by the driver:
The driver;
The'keeper'.

The keeper is taken to be the registered keeper, however, when this is a vehicle-hire firm they may relieve themselves of liability by (in short) notifying the creditor that they are and supplying the following:

(a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement;

(b)a copy of the hire agreement; and

(c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement.

The creditor may then pursue the hirer, subject to complying with conditions.

So, where would a 'car subscription service' fit in here??