Parking Eye, another driver & missed Letter Before Action

Virginia_Slim

I have today received a Claim Form from Northampton CC regarding a parking dispute.
Following the “old” advice I picked up when the event occurred in 2012, I wrote a single letter to Parking Eye explaining that (1) I wasn’t the driver and that they needed to contact the driver and (2) the driver was legitimately parked in the hotel car park while visiting a business colleague who was staying at the hotel.
Parking Eye responded with demanding letters, which, following the “old” advice, I ignored. This includes ignoring the“Letter Before Action”.
My questions:
1. I wish to send in a disagreement to the claim. Having read advice on various boards I can draft a “defendant denial letter”. However, most advice to people who have responded to the Letter Before Actionand I wonder if that makes a difference?
2. I was not the driver (unlike most of the people receiving advice). Presumably that is worth mentioning to the court?
3. Sadly I do not understand the abbreviations thrown about on various threads: LBCCC, PCN, PPC, SRA, GPEOL, MCOL.Any clues would be appreciated?
Assistance would be appreciated. Many thanks.

martmonk

I think that dates might be important here. You say 2012, can you be exact on the date of the parking 'event'?

Virginia_Slim

14 November 2012
Why is that important?

martmonk

If it had been Pre oct 2012 then there would have been no keeper liability. Unfortunately there is.

You need to search the forum for LBCCC and start reading. I'm mobile at the min rather than in front of a pc which makes posting, copying and pasting difficult. However if you click on my user name and look at recent posts you'll see a few from today with the same links for this type of situation.

zzzLazyDaisy

1. You need to go to MCOL, file the Acknowledgment of Service, and request time to defend. This extends the time for filing a defence to 28 days

2. There is a useful post here by Coupon-mad (she posts as schoolrunmum on PPP)

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=82744&pid=862298&mode=threaded&start=#entry862298

Follow the links and you will get an idea of how to formulate a defence

3. Have you complained to the hotel? They can cancel the charge even at this late stage.

See THIS thread for success stories, including hotels, and see post 3 for advice on making a successful complaint

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4766249
D

Coupon-mad

Virginia_Slim wrote: »

14 November 2012
Why is that important?

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/forumdisplay.php?f=163

Announcement: New regulations came into force 1 October 2012


That's at the top of the forum...did you miss it?! And almost every thread for the last year has mentioned that Act, which we shorten to POFA.

Virginia_Slim

I do appreciate the advice people are giving on these forums.
When I looked at the forum on 21 Nov 2012 I saw no mention of new regs. Had I looked a week later there probably would have been.
I have not looked at these website since then.
So it wasn't until I looked at this & other sites yesterday that I saw that new regs had come in.

Virginia_Slim

Dear All, Thanks to your excellent advice I have:

(1) contacted the hotel who seemed sympathetic. Maybe we’ll get some progress from them.
(2) filed an Acknowledgement of Service. This was easier than I thought it would be. I am dyslexic and find some websites tricky. This one was straight forward.

So now I will formulate a defence based on the advice suggested.

Many thanks to everyone for the superb advice on this and other websites.:j

Coupon-mad

That is progress! Bear in mind that most of these small claims NEVER make it to a court hearing, and every effort you make could be the one that ensures yours gets stopped before that.

Look in depth at the 2 links given by Daisy above; tons there about PPC small claims and how to defend, and tons about how to complain (take it to the MD or CEO of the national chain of Hotels and put it on facebook and on TripAdvisor etc., if the Hotel Manager can't help and you want to be really heard).

Coupon-mad

Any update? Got it cancelled by the Hotel manager or MD yet by loudly complaining? Do update your thread. Help is out there, see this to help with your case, I do hope you haven't folded and that you got a defence submitted in time, but there is more you can do to rattle PE's cage now:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/do-you-have-court-hearing-with.html

A lot has happened with PE small claims in recent weeks, read the blogs there.

Virginia_Slim

I filed a defence in Oct/Nov. It was based on Ian Williamson's advice dated 12 July 2013 on this forum but of course I changed the details to match the facts (I can not reproduce the link, sorry) .Today I have received a “Notice to Proceed” from ParkingEye and it looks like they will take me to court.
Their reply to the Defence is 9 pages long. Below I set out my defence and their response but not in full as it is so long. If you want the whole thing, please let me know and I’ll provide it.
HAS ANYONE GOT ANY IDEAS ON HOW TO DEFEND MYSELF at this point:
Here are the abbreviated details:
1/ I argued: “It is denied that the Claimant entered into a contract with the Defendant. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance...”
ParkingEye’s response: “PE’s Parking Charges are issued on the basis of a contract with the motorist, set out via the signage at the site. The signage sets out the terms & conditions ... and that a Parking Charge will be payable if the conditions are not met. We ensure signage is ample, clear and visible in line with the British Parking Association code of [practice...This is a matter of contract law. In ParkingEye v Kevin Shelley (2013), District Judge Dodd stated that a contract can be formed by conduct, not just in writing. He further stated that the contract, as set out on the signage is clear and certain enough and that the terms were clear and easy to understand. He stated that it was not common for courts to find penalty terms within a contract. It was further found that on private land the landholder is entitled to set out terms and conditions subject to law and that these are fully enforceable.
“The case of Vine v LB of Waltham Forest (2000) proves particularly useful in respect to the creation of a contract with the driver... (This goes on for 4 sheets of A4 paper).
2/ I argued: If there was a contract, it is denied that the penalty charge is incorporated into the contract. As per Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking [1971] 2 QB 163...
ParkingEye’s response: “PE does not believe that this Parking Charge can be considered a penalty. WE enclose a document title “Parking Charge Amount” that details exactly how the Parking Charge amounts are determined and outlines are pre-estimate of loss...this is a complex area of law and we consider it necessary to discuss this in depth. Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking maintained a contract could not be altered after it was formed... (This goes on for 2 more A4 sheets).
3) I argued: Alternatively, even if there was a contract, the provision requiring payment of £100.00 is an unenforceable penalty clause. Following Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v Selfridge and Co Ltd [1915] AC 847, clauses designed to punish a party for breach of contract may only be upheld if they represent a genuine
pre-estimate of loss...
Parking Eye’s response: Parking Eye does not believe that its Parking Charges cannot be considered unenforceable penalty clauses. We enclose a document titled “Parking Charge Amount”
4) I argued: Further and alternatively, the provision requiring payment of£100.00 is unenforceable as an unfair term contrary to Regulation 5 of The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. This is a term which falls within Schedule 1, paragraph (e) of the Regulations being a term 'requiring any consumer who fails to fulfil his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation'.
Parking Eye’s response: PE does not believe that the contract is unfair. In Combined Parking Solutions v Dorrington (2012), it was found that the contract was fair. The Judge stated: “I am satisfied that this is a contract freely entered into by the defendant. An offer was made by the owners of the land that if someone wanted to park there they could subject to charge... The Judge also referred to the case of Lord Roskill Export Credits v UOP “it is not and never has been for the court to relieve a part from the consequences of what may be in the event proved to be erroneous or possibly even a commercial imprudent bargain...”