03-02-2026, 11:48 PM
Welcome to the forum @Barbudaprince.
I have had a quick review the second draft of your witness statement and the tenancy agreement wording you have relied upon.
At this stage, I want to focus purely on what you have shown me, rather than the wider case background.
First, in relation to the tenancy and the alleged “right to park”.
Clause 4.15 of your tenancy regulates parking. It does not, on its face, grant an unfettered or exclusive right to park. It sets conditions. It prohibits parking except where there is a garage, parking space, or driveway with hardstanding and a dropped kerb. It also states that where a parking scheme is in operation, a valid permit must be displayed.
That is important. The clause is regulatory rather than proprietary. It does not expressly grant you a demised parking space. It does not state that no third-party enforcement may apply. It does not exclude the possibility of a permit scheme. In fact, it anticipates one.
Your current draft overstates the strength of the primacy argument. Saying that the tenancy “overrides” signage or that no enforcement power exists is stronger than the wording itself supports. The lease does not grant the Claimant enforcement rights, but equally it does not grant you an unconditional right to park without compliance with a scheme.
This does not mean the argument fails. It means it must be framed carefully and factually. The strength of the residential defence will depend on matters such as whether a specific bay was allocated to you, whether the scheme was introduced after your tenancy began, whether there was any formal variation, and how the site is physically arranged. Those facts matter more than abstract statements about primacy.
Second, the structure of the document.
As drafted, this reads far more like an expanded defence or skeleton argument than a witness statement.
A witness statement should set out facts within your knowledge. It should explain what happened. It should identify documents you rely upon. It should avoid legal argument and rhetorical questions.
Your draft repeatedly moves into advocacy. It makes CPR strike-out submissions. It asserts that the claim should be struck out. It argues abuse of process. It challenges mediation conduct. It includes rhetorical questions about contract formation. It repeats conclusions such as “therefore the alleged contraventions did not occur”.
Those are submissions. They belong in a skeleton argument or at the hearing. They should not dominate a witness statement.
Judges in small claims prefer clear, factual, first-person evidence. When a witness statement reads like argument, the risk is that it is skimmed or mentally discounted as advocacy.
At this stage, my advice based solely on what you have shown me is:
The tenancy argument needs to be recalibrated to reflect what the wording actually says.
The witness statement needs to be rewritten in a factual, first-person structure, with legal conclusions stripped back.
The legal points on PoFA, keeper liability, vague Particulars of Claim and added costs can remain in play, but they need to be expressed as factual observations rather than procedural submissions.
I will now review the case in full once you provide the relevant facts, the Particulars of Claim and the defence as filed. After that, I will give you more detailed advice and assist with a properly structured witness statement.
I will revert within 24 hours once I have had the opportunity to assess the matter in full.
In the meantime, to assist me in getting all the facts consolidated in one place for easy reference, could you please complete the PCN details form here and paste the summary as a reply to this thread:
https://gullibletree.com/tools/pcnform_main.html
Have you received the claimants WS? If so, please can you also provide a link to it.
I have had a quick review the second draft of your witness statement and the tenancy agreement wording you have relied upon.
At this stage, I want to focus purely on what you have shown me, rather than the wider case background.
First, in relation to the tenancy and the alleged “right to park”.
Clause 4.15 of your tenancy regulates parking. It does not, on its face, grant an unfettered or exclusive right to park. It sets conditions. It prohibits parking except where there is a garage, parking space, or driveway with hardstanding and a dropped kerb. It also states that where a parking scheme is in operation, a valid permit must be displayed.
That is important. The clause is regulatory rather than proprietary. It does not expressly grant you a demised parking space. It does not state that no third-party enforcement may apply. It does not exclude the possibility of a permit scheme. In fact, it anticipates one.
Your current draft overstates the strength of the primacy argument. Saying that the tenancy “overrides” signage or that no enforcement power exists is stronger than the wording itself supports. The lease does not grant the Claimant enforcement rights, but equally it does not grant you an unconditional right to park without compliance with a scheme.
This does not mean the argument fails. It means it must be framed carefully and factually. The strength of the residential defence will depend on matters such as whether a specific bay was allocated to you, whether the scheme was introduced after your tenancy began, whether there was any formal variation, and how the site is physically arranged. Those facts matter more than abstract statements about primacy.
Second, the structure of the document.
As drafted, this reads far more like an expanded defence or skeleton argument than a witness statement.
A witness statement should set out facts within your knowledge. It should explain what happened. It should identify documents you rely upon. It should avoid legal argument and rhetorical questions.
Your draft repeatedly moves into advocacy. It makes CPR strike-out submissions. It asserts that the claim should be struck out. It argues abuse of process. It challenges mediation conduct. It includes rhetorical questions about contract formation. It repeats conclusions such as “therefore the alleged contraventions did not occur”.
Those are submissions. They belong in a skeleton argument or at the hearing. They should not dominate a witness statement.
Judges in small claims prefer clear, factual, first-person evidence. When a witness statement reads like argument, the risk is that it is skimmed or mentally discounted as advocacy.
At this stage, my advice based solely on what you have shown me is:
The tenancy argument needs to be recalibrated to reflect what the wording actually says.
The witness statement needs to be rewritten in a factual, first-person structure, with legal conclusions stripped back.
The legal points on PoFA, keeper liability, vague Particulars of Claim and added costs can remain in play, but they need to be expressed as factual observations rather than procedural submissions.
I will now review the case in full once you provide the relevant facts, the Particulars of Claim and the defence as filed. After that, I will give you more detailed advice and assist with a properly structured witness statement.
I will revert within 24 hours once I have had the opportunity to assess the matter in full.
In the meantime, to assist me in getting all the facts consolidated in one place for easy reference, could you please complete the PCN details form here and paste the summary as a reply to this thread:
https://gullibletree.com/tools/pcnform_main.html
Have you received the claimants WS? If so, please can you also provide a link to it.
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. - Mark Twain
