Parking Eye - County Court Defence

Katie-Kat-Kins

jeanraffio wrote: »

With respect, I don't think that you looked anywhere near hard enough here on these forums. Virtually every other thread states the basics of how to beat a PPC - and the advice is ALWAYS appeal through POPLA using the GPEOL argument - not one of these appeals has ever lost with the advice on these forums from regulars (running into the 100s).

That said we are where we are, and Parking Eye will almost certainly now serve court papers. Look out for something through the door labelled LBCCC (or very similar) which starts the legal ball rolling. Read through some of the more detailed threads regarding PE and court action / LBCCC (there are *lots* here on the forum) and come back and ask any specific questions.

I have received the county court claim form.

I am looking for advice on drafting the defence to it.

With respect, I spent several evenings trawling the advice on here and could not see how I had a chance of making an appeal under the POPLA rules.

Katie-Kat-Kins

peter_the_piper wrote: »

Would you really think that a set of adjudicators hired by the BPA would tell you the best way to defeat a ppc? They try to show they are independent but they have been giving the ppc's lessons on how to interpret the rules.
Regarding your and other cases, don't bother to worry about whether your case fits the appeal criteria or not, just go for the winning strategy. However that course may not be open to you. Follow the advice given on here and pepipoo.com on how to beat them at county court.

Thanks

As I say, I checked various sources and could not see how my case fitted the grounds for appeal, and the advice on here seemed to suggest that POPLA only had authority to hear cases that fit certain criteria.

Have POPLA been making decisions that charges are disproportionate or that their charges amount to a penalty? Because other than putting Parking Eye to proof that pretty much sums up my defence.

4consumerrights

Katie-Kat-Kins - Stop fretting about POPLA now - sadly you missed your chance (No liability has a blank box when you receive a POPLA form to tick by the way - therefore open to interpretation). Also the appeal can be made on any grounds - which they don't advertise as BPA and PPCs fund POPLA.

I recently did a skeleton bullet point defence list for someone else see post #5 on this thread:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4814557

Follow also Coupon Mad's other links in posts including this one

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=62971894&postcount=65

Follow also Traindrivers original thread for insight.

Another relevant read for you is this one:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4816165

bod1467

Some threads maybe worth reading ...

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4800540 PE defeated in court

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4812058 PE drop court case

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4784029 Ongoing court defence (not PE but should help with what YOU can think about)

jeanraffio

Katie-Kat-Kins wrote: »

Have POPLA been making decisions that charges are disproportionate or that their charges amount to a penalty? Because other than putting Parking Eye to proof that pretty much sums up my defence.

Yes, POPLA have been pretty much decided that PPC charges are not a GPEOL. Every single time, without fail. That's your argument and POPLA winner right there. People are using word for word templates and winning every time.

It's a defence that wins every time for POPLA and has for lots and lots of people here.

Unfortunately at court you are at the behest of the court itself, it's a lottery. You may get a good judge, a bad judge, an unprepared solicitor, your defence may not be solid, key points missed etc. There's lots of Us v PE court wins here on this forum (mainly through incompetence on their part) but it does and will have to go through the system.

Coupon-mad

Katie-Kat-Kins wrote: »

Beginning of the year.

I read the advice. It said that if you have grounds to appeal to POPLA do, I didn't so I went with the rest of the advice, sent one letter (based on a template on here) refusing to pay and ignored the rest of the threats.

Anyway I still don't see how my circumstances fit with the grounds for appeal.

Grounds as stated on POPLA

- The vehicle was not improperly parked: e.g. that the vehicle was not parked where stated on the parking charge notice; that you believe you were still within the time you paid for; that the voucher was clearly displayed or that the conditions were not properly signed.
-The parking charge (ticket) exceeded the appropriate amount: e.g. that you are being asked to pay the wrong amount for the parking charge or that the charge has already been paid.
-The vehicle was stolen: e.g. that the vehicle was improperly parked after being stolen. However, the fact that someone else was driving your vehicle, for example a family member, friend or colleague, is not in itself a valid ground of appeal. The fact that you told the driver that they could only use your vehicle on condition they did not get any parking tickets is not a valid ground of appeal.
-I am not liable for the parking charge: e.g. that you had sold the vehicle before, or bought it after, the alleged improper parking. However, the fact that you had paid to park the vehicle in the first place (even if, for example, the voucher was not clearly displayed) is not in itself a valid ground of appeal.

You didn't read my link then before you replied, even though you quoted it?

peter_the_piper

Right , you ignored a chance of 100% win at popla, now you need a help defending a county court claim. Basically its the same. I'm sure people on here and Pepipoo.com will advise the correct way. Next time (if there is a next time) come back before you ignore a certain winner at popla.

Katie-Kat-Kins

I'm in the process of wading through all the links. A couple of points I have come accross and could do with clarification on.

I have seen the following:
"If the PCN was issued before May 2013, the NtK is also non-compliant with PoFa 2012, as it doesn't identify the creditor, PoFA is very strict about the PPC complying with ALL parts of PoFA, so if you are the RK you can also ask the court to strike out the claim on the basis that they have chosen to issue proceedings against you, as the registered keeper, when the only avenue they have to do so is by relying on PoFA, and they have failed to comply with the requirements for this."

My PCN was well before May, how can I check whether it is compliant? What isn't compliant so that I can plead it?

I've also been reading about Practice Direction 4. In what way have Parking Eye failed to comply with PD 4? I would like to put this in the defence if possible.

Umkomaas

Katie-Kat-Kins wrote: »

I'm in the process of wading through all the links. A couple of points I have come accross and could do with clarification on.

I have seen the following:
"If the PCN was issued before May 2013, the NtK is also non-compliant with PoFa 2012, as it doesn't identify the creditor, PoFA is very strict about the PPC complying with ALL parts of PoFA, so if you are the RK you can also ask the court to strike out the claim on the basis that they have chosen to issue proceedings against you, as the registered keeper, when the only avenue they have to do so is by relying on PoFA, and they have failed to comply with the requirements for this."

My PCN was well before May, how can I check whether it is compliant? What isn't compliant so that I can plead it?

I've also been reading about Practice Direction 4. In what way have Parking Eye failed to comply with PD 4? I would like to put this in the defence if possible.

This is the link that posters are referred to in order to check whether theIr NtK is PoFA compliant. But, to be honest, whilst it is a useful additional point to an appeal, you shouldn't rely on it as your main line of defence. There are far better ones - as some of the above links will provide.

http://www.parkingcowboys.co.uk/keeper-liability/

Coupon-mad

You can mention it - but there so much more to a proper defence. More important would be that (presumably) PE sent you a 'Letter before Action'? These LBAs or LBCCC letters are non-compliant with the Practice Direction - some versions worse than others. See the LBCCC fight-back thread near the top of the forum to expose the flaws with either version.

But see other court case threads to see how to put a defence together; it is a matter of going back, say a dozen pages and clicking on every thread title about Northampton/Court claims, any PE court cases, and reading the advice & learning from people's defence wordings shown. Do the same on pepipoo forum where every 3rd or 4th thread is like yours and FULL of advice and examples of defence wording:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showforum=60

You will learn all you need to know with a day or two of reading research of other threads. Prioritise acknowledging the claim then sending a defence - even if a short 'holding defence' which you will see mentioned in some recent pepipoo Small Claim threads. And meanwhile complain VERY assertively and rattle the cages of the Store Manager and CEO of any national chain on site, and retail park centre management, and Parking Eye themselves by letter. You'll get the idea from other threads where people have got the scam stopped by being very proactive.