Rewrite a Defence and Counterclaim to UK High Court Standards, particularised

I'm looking for an experienced legal professional to rewrite a defence and counterclaim to meet the specific standards of the UK High Court. The current length of the defence and counterclaim is 30 pages (with 90 pages of evidence, which will remain as-is). I am looking for someone with expertise specifically in contract law, tort law, possession, SMI loans, GDPR, DPA, costs, defamation, Companies Act and Jurisdiction. This project needs to be completed within 1 day or two. I've reduced the burden by reserving the counterclaim for a separate counter-suit. When I strip out the pages that belong in applications, the Defence is mainly 14 pages, with an extra page of paragraphs from other sections. The claimant has admitted the cornerstones of the case. The evidence is clear cut. My opposition is mainly arguing against statute as-written. I have just had surgery so I am not at my best. The weakness is I do not write pleadings well in this state - as the Judge has told me. He asked me to amend the defence to 12 pages. It should be very well particularised with clear causes to action, etc. I can argue cases well, but not write the pleadings well. I want each paragraph to have a reference to law, or jurisprudence or both. But I have Lexis+ so I can do that part. Unless you can help with that too. Those 12 pages must be really good. The opposition have written a 35 page reply but only 17 relate to the defence, with many admissions, and specious denials. I also need a reply to those pages, but their arguments should be very easy to shoot down. I can flesh out those arguments but I need the main points. Please help. I have more than 100 other cases I need help with and I am recruiting partners. I keep getting results for generative AI but I prefer humans. The case is simply this - a wrongful claim of possession. My rich client's company was subjected to a terror attack. As a result of the disruption he made a claim for an SMI Loan under statute, and it was granted. His mortgage company denies there was an SMI loan. The evidence presented shows that they had been served with proof of it from the horse's mouth. They claim arrears for the amount covered by the loan and possession. This matter has escalated well beyond expectations. My client wishes to prosecute for everything possible. This matter has continued in litigation for nearing up to a year.