Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • JohnAllan
    • By JohnAllan 24th Aug 17, 6:25 PM
    • 14Posts
    • 7Thanks
    JohnAllan
    Claim Form Defence Advice
    • #1
    • 24th Aug 17, 6:25 PM
    Claim Form Defence Advice 24th Aug 17 at 6:25 PM
    Hello, I've read a lot of information on here regarding the process to take when faced with a parking ticket. I'm at the stage now where a defence from myself is required through a claims form and I'm here to seek advice on what to say based on the circumstances. I will outline the history below.

    February 2017

    I had a 'Parking Notice' packet attached to my window after spending the day parking on SIP Carpark on Jersey Street in Manchester. I had been parking here numerous times during the previous months and have always paid for a ticket. I had a valid ticket clearly displayed in my window so was quite shocked when I received the notice, and assumed it was because they did not see my displayed ticket. The notice and ticket was kept safe should anything of come up.

    Based on a little bit of research I purposely, and probably wrongly ignored the notice and expected it to just go away. A few months passed and I had received a few letters demanding money. These letters where going to my parents house which is actually my previous address. I have since updated my address details on DVLA.


    May / June 2017

    I received an alarming letter threatening court action. I now believe this letter to be the LBC, which shouldn’t really be ignored. So I telephoned SIP Car Parks to query the charges seeing as I had a ticket clearly displayed. They told me that the notice was because I was parked in a space which was for contractual use only. Apparently it was for some of the work men working on a nearby site. I don’t remember seeing any sign explaining this and it was the usual side I had always parked on. I told the company that I didn’t think this was fair and I was not planning to pay it. Their reply was ‘We’ll see you in court then’.


    August 23rd 2017

    During a visit to my parents house a brown envelope was waiting for me. I opened it and it was a claims form from a county court in Northampton from Gladstone Soliciters. Dated 9th August 2017. I spent the first few hours researching this form, because the ones I’d seen online where blue, and looked more official. This one has a photocopied stamp on and the crest at the top looks very pixelated. After some more research it was apparent that I needed to log into MCOL and file an Acceptance of service. I did so by signing up with Government Gateway and followed some simple instructions, which now has allowed me an extra 14 days to file a defence.

    The total amount is currently for a total of £240.05. £165.05 for the claim, £25 court fee, and £50 legal costs.


    August 24th 2017

    With this situation on my mind now, I tried to log back in to MCOL but with no success. The password was wrong for some reason. I wanted to make sure the AOS was delivered and the claim was not going to default to a CCJ. I tried to call the county court 20 times in row using different contact numbers, and not one answer.

    I decided to ring a more local county court to see if they could help me. I gave them my claim number and they could see that I had recently filed the AOS and I now had until the 11th of September to file my defence.

    After this, I emailed MCOL and received some strange replies. They where not helpful in the slightest to get me back into my account, and explained that the defence could be submitted via email or post (which I've since learned that this is the best way to submit). I plan to send it via email. I've also gave them my updated address, so any further correspondence will come straight to me.

    I’ve since spoken to my friend who has studied law and his advice was to explain that no sign was visible to me regarding contractual spaces. We’ve spoke a little more and have decided that because the claim details on the claim form do not describe the reason, rather it just states that I had breached the terms, then I should send a photograph of my valid ticket to them explaining I had paid for a ticket and take it from there.

    I had kept the ticket safe, but the bad news is that now I can not find it anywhere. I have spent most of the day searching high and low.

    So with no attempt from myself to appeal the notice, no ticket for proof, and no recollection of a sign stating the spaces where for contractual workers, I’m now seeking some advice on which direction to go to defend myself. I’m aware of the things not to say from reading another thread on here, but my question now is what should I say? Am I to just ask for proof my car was without a ticket? Am I to explain the telephone conversation and write about not seeing any sign? Should I not mention the telephone conversation? Am I to request photographs that my car was a. without a ticket and/or b. clearly parked in a place where I shouldn’t of been?

    Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
Page 2
    • JohnAllan
    • By JohnAllan 26th Aug 17, 2:17 AM
    • 14 Posts
    • 7 Thanks
    JohnAllan
    This one isn't about being parked without a PDT on display, it's an allegation of parking in a restricted area. And yes, I would defend this as driver, under these circumstances.
    Originally posted by Coupon-mad
    Does my defence still need to be written in the 3rd person?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 26th Aug 17, 3:52 PM
    • 51,876 Posts
    • 65,516 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Yes, things like ''it is admitted that the Defendant is the driver of the vehicle at the material time'' and ''it is denied that the car was parked in a marked restricted area''.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • JohnAllan
    • By JohnAllan 27th Aug 17, 6:08 PM
    • 14 Posts
    • 7 Thanks
    JohnAllan
    Ok great, thanks. I have pasted an updated defence below. If anyone can pick this apart over the next few days I'm willing to wait a little longer before I submit this so ensure it has the upmost success.

    Can anyone please tell me the normal process after the court have received this defence? And what I am to expect.

    Thank you.



    FAO: CCBC
    Claim No: XXXXXXXX
    Issue Date: XX XX XX

    Statement of Defence

    I am X, the defendant in this matter. It is admitted that the Defendant was the authorised registered keeper and the driver of the vehicle in question at the time of the alleged incident. The Defendant denies liability for the entirety of the claim for the following reasons.

    1. The particulars of claim do not meet the requirements of Practice Direction as there is nothing which specifies how the terms were breached. Indeed the particulars of claim are not clear and concise as is required. The Claimants are known to be serial issuers of generic claims similar to this one. HM Courts Service have identified over 1000 similar sparse claims. I believe the term for such behaviour is ‘Roboclaims’ and as such is against the public interest.

    2. On the 20th September 2016 another relevant poorly pleaded private parking charge claim by Gladstones was struck out by District Judge Cross of St Albans County Court without a hearing due to their ‘Roboclaim’ particulars being incoherent, failing to comply with CPR. 16.4 and ‘providing no facts that could give rise to any apparent claim in law.’

    3. On the 27th July 2016 DJ Anson sitting at Preston County Court ruled that the very similar parking charge particulars of claim were efficient and failing to meet CPR 16.4 and PD 16 paragraphs 7.3 – 7.6. He ordered the Claimant in that case to file new particulars which they failed to do and so the court confirmed that the claim be struck out.

    4. This has prejudiced the Defendant's chance to understand the cause of action in this case, and the Defendant can only surmise that it may relate to an unwarranted 'PCN' placed on the car in February, when the driver had paid and displayed correctly. On the basis of the above, I request the court strike out the claim for want of a cause of action.

    5. The Defendant made a telephone call to the Claimant in June questioning the parking charge as to which the Claimant explained the charges incurred due to the driver being parked in an area allocated for contractual workers.

    6. Attempts were made to appeal the charge and the Defendant reasonably believed it was cancelled. Not least because there was no breach of contract and the tariff was paid, and in the phone call the Claimant suggested the car might have been in a restricted area, which the Defendant avers was not the case because the driver regularly parks in that area of the car park and the parking tariff is always paid for the space, in compliance with the signs.

    7. There will have been standard signs up but no prominent ones were seen to tell the driver that this area was a temporary no-parking zone for non contractual workers. No signs and lines where seen to even suggest that, and this goes against the IPC CoP which says operators should add extra signs if they are either in a new site, or if restrictions have changed recently.

    8. Clearly a temporary requisitioning of normally-used spaces is a big change and would need big signs/lines. And if this area was meant to be a no parking zone then there can have been no offer to park there. That would be a perverse situation: ‘’These spaces are for contractual workers only, no parking, but if you pay extra we will let you do what we've just prohibited”.

    9. Even if the court finds that signs prohibiting parking were adjacent to the vehicle, it is confidently argued that these cannot have been prominent. Therefor no contract has been formed. Even if the court finds there were prominent signs, the Defendant avers that a prohibition on parking cannot also be a contractual offer to do that which is forbidden, for a 'charge’.

    10. Even if the court is minded to believe that this site could, in theory, charge money for an issue such as this one (unrelated to the pay and display 'rules') then in any case, this would be an issue falling only under the tort of trespass, a matter which remains in the gift of the landowner themselves only.

    11. The Claimant has sent threatening and misleading demands which stated that further debt recovery action would be taken to recover what is owed by passing the debt to a recovery agent (which suggested to the Defendant they would be calling round like bailiffs) adding further unexplained charges with no evidence of how this extra charge has been calculated. No figure for additional charges was 'agreed' nor could it have formed part of the alleged 'contract' because no such indemnity costs were quantified on the signs.

    I believe the facts stated in this defence are true.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 27th Aug 17, 8:55 PM
    • 51,876 Posts
    • 65,516 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Can anyone please tell me the normal process after the court have received this defence? And what I am to expect.
    The NEWBIES thread already does exactly that, in a link to a post by bargepole explaining it.

    With this point (below) I would not make it sound so reasonable! It was news to you, so saying they 'explained' something sounds like they were in the right, to me. You want to paint the opposite picture of the truth:
    5. The Defendant made a telephone call to the Claimant in June questioning the parking charge as to which the Claimant alleged for the first time, that explained the charges incurred was apparently due to the driver Defendant being parked in an area allocated for contractual workers. This was the first time the Defendant knew about this bay apparently having been requisitioned for workers, something that was not the case, not communicated with any barrier or clear extra signs, at the material time of parking in the bay as usual.
    You might want to add some headings and plagiarise some of this one I wrote yesterday on pepipoo (not the bits about primacy of contract):

    http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=107768&st=80&p=1311428&#entry1 311428

    The headings, the first preliminary points (except the bit about losing an IAS appeal, unless you did) and the section about:

    No contract and no breach - this bay has never been ''undesignated'' nor was it clearly marked as such
    and all the parts that follow that section, lend themselves to your case as well because you are arguing that they arbitrarily removed a bay from normal use and failed to sign that prominently. Similar to that one in some ways.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • JohnAllan
    • By JohnAllan 2nd Oct 17, 11:57 AM
    • 14 Posts
    • 7 Thanks
    JohnAllan
    Hello, and thanks for all the help on this so far. I filed my defence and have now received a questionnaire.

    Would someone help in answering the first two questions? This may be an obvious answer, but would I be agreeing with the following, or not?

    A1 - Do you agree to this case being referred to the small claims mediation service?

    C1 - Do you agree that the small claims track is the appropriate track for this case?

    And I take it the hearing venue should be one closest to me?

    Are SIP likely to not turn up?

    Thank you,

    John
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 2nd Oct 17, 12:04 PM
    • 51,876 Posts
    • 65,516 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Would someone help in answering the first two questions? This may be an obvious answer, but would I be agreeing with the following, or not?
    All fully covered, Q by Q, by bargepole in the link in the NEWBIES thread post #2 about what happens when and how to complete your DQ.

    And I take it the hearing venue should be one closest to me?
    Yes.

    Are SIP likely to not turn up?
    No, Gladstones are likely to send a legal rep (who may have no Rights of Audience, more reading for you!).
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

3,856Posts Today

7,106Users online

Martin's Twitter