Help! County Court Claim from Premier Park LTD

chili_pea

Thank you.
Is it worth mentioning anything about the incorrect date being on the original ticket in my defence?

Oh and the fact that PP did not send a LBCCC?

Coupon-mad

Yes to both, show us a new draft so we can help.

chili_pea

Hope you have all had a good xmas! Heres my amended draft with the fantastic help of Bargepole and Coupan mad.

Claim Number: *****

BETWEEN:

Premier Park LTD (Claimant)


vs


******* (Defendant)

___________________________________________________________________________

Statement of Defence

I am **** of ** ********, defendant in this matter.
1. Facts of the Case

a) I am the registered keeper of vehicle registration number ****. On 19/06/2013, I had occasion to park at ******, as a bona fide tenant of the premises served by this car park. Following the visit, I received a Parking Charge Notice from the Claimant, in which they sought to obtain a sum of money for an alleged parking in a no parking area. Following the prevailing advice on reputable consumer forums and the BBC Watchdog programme, I ignored these notices and subsequent letters from the Claimant, as I believed their demands to be a speculative invoicing scam. The Claimant has now issued a claim in the sum of £155.03 plus court costs.

b) It should be noted that, until very recently, that is after the last material date to which this claim relates, the Claimant has erected prominent signage at the entrance to this car park. Prior to that, on all material dates, there was no signage at all at the entrance to this car park. The Claimant is a member of the British Parking Association Ltd., and is required by that trade association’s Code of Practice section 18.2, to ensure that signage is clearly displayed at the entrance to car parks, such signage to be of a format and size recommended by the BPA. The Claimant is therefore in breach of their own trade association’s code of practice, and as a result could be suspended from accessing registered keeper details by the DVLA.

c) The defendant is unable to admit or deny the precise times she was parked in ****** as she has no recollection of this. The claimant is put to proof of the same. Evidence shows this as original Parking Charge Notice is dated the 19/06/2013 and the photographs taken by Premier Park LTD are dated the 12/06/2013.

d) Further and/or in the alternative, the claimant failed to serve a Letter Before Claim on the defendant and/or to comply with its obligations under the Practice Direction on Pre-action Conduct.
i) It is the defendant's case that it would benefit the parties and relieve the court of an unnecessary burden if the parties were to complete the pre-action steps
ii) In particularly it is the defendant's case that this dispute is capable of being resolved by reference to the Parking on Private Lands Appeal service (POPLA) which is the suitable form of ADR set up by the parking industry for this purpose

2. Main Points of Defence

My defence to this claim relies principally on four main points, as follows:

a) Lack of Standing by Claimant: The Claimant is not the landowner of the car park, and has no proprietary interest in it. This means that the Claimant, as a matter of law, has no locus standi to litigate in their own name. The contract is between the Defendant and landowner/landlord that has no reference to parking terms and conditions that can be enforced by a Private Parking Company.

b) No Loss Suffered by Claimant: I assume, based on reports of other cases involving the Claimant, that their claim is based on damages for alleged breach of contract. It is a fundamental principle of English Law, that a party who suffers damages through breach of contract, can only seek through court action to be put back in the same position as they would have been if the breach had not occurred. In order to do so, they must demonstrate their actual, or genuine pre-estimate of, loss. I submit that no loss has been suffered by the Claimant as a result of any alleged breaches of contract on my part.

c) Insufficient Signage to form Contract: As outlined above, there were (at all material times) no signs at the entrance to the car park. The signage inside the car park is place well above eye level, such that it would not reasonably be seen by anyone driving into the car park. I therefore submit that the signage, such as it was, was insufficient to form any contract with motorists.

d) Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations: This provides that “A contractual term which has not been individual negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer” Evidence shows a letter from the Defendants counsellor and a crime reference number (*****) relating to an incident that happened seven weeks before the Defendant “Parked in a no parking area” This was made aware to Premier Park LTD in the Defendant’s first appeal. As a result of this incident the Defendants income decreased by 50% Therefore the Defendant had no access to an income to cover the costs of the parking ticket.


3. Case Law Relied Upon:

a) With regard to point 2a, I rely upon the following cases:
VCS v Ibbotson (S!!!!horpe County Court, 2012). A full transcript is appended at Appendix A
ParkingEye v Sharma (Brentford County Court, October 2013) The Judgment, and reasons for refusing leave to appeal, are appended at Appendix B
Parking Eye v Gardam (High Wycombe County Court, November 2013) Here District Judge Jones examined the parking company’s landowner contract, and ruled that the claimant had no standing to bring claims in its own name. The Approved Judgment for this case is appended at Appendix C.
b) With regard to point 2b, I rely upon the following cases:
OBServices v Thurlow (Worcester County Court, 2011) (Appeal hearing before Circuit Judge). A transcript is appended at Appendix D.
Excel Parking Services v Hetherington-Jakeman (Mansfield County Court, 2008). The Claimant, Excel, will undoubtedly be familiar with the fact that the District Judge dismissed the claim on the basis that the parking charges were not related to any loss by the claimant, but were simply arbitrary sums designed to “frighten and intimidate”. A transcript is appended at Appendix E.
c) With regard to point 2c, I rely on the following case: Excel Parking Services v Martin Cutts (Stockport County Court, 2011). The Approved Judgment is appended at Appendix F.

4. Conclusion
I deny that I am liable to the Claimant for the sums claimed, or any amount at all. I invite the Court to strike out the claim as being without merit, and with no realistic prospect of success.

I believe the facts stated in this Defence are true.


…………………………….. …………………
(Signed by Defendant) (Date)

Coupon-mad

I suggest expanding on this bit, as shown:

I ignored these notices and subsequent letters from the Claimant, as I believed their demands to be a speculative invoicing scam involving invoices which impersonate parking tickets. I contend this was a reasonable belief because the Claimant does not own nor have any assignment of title in this car park and I had never heard of them, not having seen any signs nor entered into any contract at all with Premier Park Ltd. to my knowledge.


I don't understand this bit, why would you call it a 'Parking Ticket' and details about your income adds nothing to a defence:

''Evidence shows a letter from the Defendants counsellor and a crime reference number (*****) relating to an incident that happened seven weeks before the Defendant “Parked in a no parking area” This was made aware to Premier Park LTD in the Defendant’s first appeal. As a result of this incident the Defendants income decreased by 50% Therefore the Defendant had no access to an income to cover the costs of the parking ticket.''


I would remove that unless there's a reason for it I have missed?

Also see what others add.