Help needed

Coupon-mad

Cbella38 wrote: »

Let me get this clear before the paper work is sent back to the courts.

Even though the defendant was not the driver on the acknowledgement of service we just tick the box ' I intend to defend all of this claim '? Does how's say in a box of the defendants name is different for what's on claim form , should the driver not put their details in that box .?

Have the MP onto this as KEEPER and DRIVER was under the impression that the notice was served due to being late but when reading the letter again the MP picked up that in fact their issue is not displaying a valid ticket.
The photos that were taken of the car clearly show a ticket on the dashboard and it just so happens the ticket used on that day was found in the car on Friday whilst being cleaned out.

Ticket brought at 15.56 expired at 16.56, photo of car was taken at 16.57 .driver got back to the car at just after 17.00 so to what MP could see there was a ticket in the window so is writing to the company herself as she thinks it's utterly ridiculous.

No the driver does not and cannot defend a claim addressed to the keeper. The defendant's name is on the court papers and that is who defends.

in a box if the defendants name is different for what's on claim form

That's just for cases where, say, the defendant has got married or is known by a different name - you can't write a different person in the box. And the keeper is in a much better position to defend than a driver anyway.

Glad your MP is writing but the keeper MUST still defend. It will not go away and you risk a CCJ if not defending in time. You will have 28 days from service of the court papers, if you get it acknowledged on MCOL to extend the 14 days that way.

Leave the defence blank, you are only doing 'acknowledgement of service' and not contesting jurisdiction or anything else.

Cbella38

Thank you so much for advice. The papers get sent back to Gladstones or the court and then in the meantime write the defence ? Can I post the defence statement on this thread to see if it is OK?

Redx

I would suggest you read the court sub-section in the NEWBIES sticky thread

BARGEPOLE has written and how to on all of this

acknowledging is done online on the MCOL website

bargepole then recommends printing the defence (after its been approved , so yes post it on here in a "generic" form (no personal info or references etc) and then print it in the exact format he suggests and POST it to the court , like HE suggests , within the allowed timeframe

his method is the best method , tried and tested

the person named on the papers is the defendant , the person being taken to court, so it is they who must defend it , their name etc

other people can help, but ultimately it is the defendant that writes/signs the defence , is the one being written to, is the one who must attend court if its all being done in person (recommended) - so none of this "done on papers" malarkey

so if YOU are the person named on the court papers, then YOU must deal with it

if not, you can help the person named on the court papers to deal with it , but they must sign and submit the paperwork and turn up in court

this has nothing to do with the keeper or the driver, it could be about a plumbers invoice that has remained unpaid , where no driving was involved and no vehicle either

this is about people , in this case the person named as DEFENDANT on the court papers , simple as that (this person may not even be the keeper or the driver , could be the owner , but it is certainly a human being that is being taken to court , with their name written on the paperwork , so as CM says , a person)

these papers came from Northampton court, so the acknowledgement is done online with Northampton court , the defence goes into Northampton court when it is ready, before the 28 day deadline expires (extended from 14 to 28 days when acknowledged)

cant be more clearer than that !!

Coupon-mad

Cbella38 wrote: »

Thank you so much for advice. The papers get sent back to Gladstones or the court and then in the meantime write the defence ? Can I post the defence statement on this thread to see if it is OK?

You do nothing with 'the papers'. Read the NEWBIES thread post #2 first please, it is there to inform you so you know the basics.

Cbella38

twhitehousescat wrote: »

euro car parks , do not like court , http://www.bmpa.eu/companydata/Euro_Car_Parks.html

YES they may try a claim on a very easy case , however they are clutching at straws with regard to the COP of their trade assoc stating that they should allow a grace period

13 Grace periods
13.1 Your approach to parking management must allow a
driver who enters your car park but decides not to park,
to leave the car park within a reasonable period without
having their vehicle issued with a parking charge notice.
13.2 You should allow the driver a reasonable ‘grace period’
in which to decide if they are going to stay or go. If the
driver is on your land without permission you should still
allow them a grace period to read your signs and leave
before you take enforcement action.
13.3 You should be prepared to tell us the specific grace period
at a site if our compliance team or our agents ask what it is.
13.4 You should allow the driver a reasonable period to leave
the private car park after the parking contract has ended,
before you take enforcement action


upon telling euro that the driver had an "impairment " they should then apply

16 Disabled motorists
16.1 The Equality Act 2010 says that providers of services to
the public must make ‘reasonable adjustments’ to remove
barriers which may discriminate against disabled people.
16.2 ‘Reasonable adjustments’ to prevent discrimination are
likely to include larger ‘disabled’ parking spaces near to
the entrance or amenities for disabled people whose
mobility is impaired. It also could include lowered
payment machines and other ways to pay if payment is
required: for example, paying by phone. You and your
staff also need to realise that some disabled people may
take a long time to get to the payment machine.
16.3 Operators of off-street car parks do not have to
recognise the Blue Badge scheme. But many choose to
do so to meet their obligations under the Equality Act.
Although a Blue Badge is not issued to all disabled people
it is issued to those with mobility problems. So it is a
good way for parking operators to identify people who
need special parking provision.
16.4 You are at risk of a claim under the Equality Act if you
do not discourage abuse of the ‘disabled’ spaces. This
means that you need to make sure the spaces are
regularly checked to be sure they are not being used
by people who do not have a disability.
16.5 If your landowner provides a concession that allows
parking for disabled people, if a vehicle displays a valid
Blue Badge you must not issue it with parking charge
notices.

Where did you find this Grace period information from as looked on website you quoted but can't find this information which we want to quote in defence statement- Thanks

Redx

it will be from the IPC CoP from the IPC website , downloaded as a pdf

any defence in court would be partly based on IPC CoP failures , are you saying you have not read it and have not used any aspect of it in your draft defence ?

Cbella38

Starting to write defence today . Found another thing when reading up on stuff past night , stage one was missed so had no ticket on screen. There issue isn't the lateness it's not having a 'valid ticket on view' yet pictures show the ticket on dashboard plus have original ticket. Also 1st reply back from the parking company has a different issue date on letter to the 'notices'

Do you know of a specific defence statement I can look at that's in line with this issue ? If you do that would be helpful.

Coupon-mad

You need to use Schedule 4 which sets out the deadlines under para 8 or 9 (windscreen PCN or postal PCN deadlines and details needed in the NTK). Schedule 4 is linked in the NEWBIES thread post #1, after the appeal templates, where it says 'if you want to dig deeper'.

Cbella38

Helped to write a defence statement and would like your advice if we have included enough information - not written one before and looked at other statements - some worded paragraphs are just way over my head

IN THE COUNTY COURT

Claim No.:

xxxxxxx

Between

EURO PARKING SERVICES LIMITED

LTD

-and-

xxxxxxxxxx

(Defendant)

___________________________________________________________________________

DEFENCE STATEMENT

___________________________________________________________________________


I assert that I am not liable to the Claimant for the sum claimed, or any amount at all, for the


following reasons:

• I am the registered keeper of the vehicle in question. The Claim relates to an alleged debt arising from when the car which was not driven by myself on the 22/11/2016 was parked at(name of car park).

• The Claimant is aware of this as an appeal was made when Notice to Keeper was sent via the post.

• The vehicle was parked in a bay and a ticket was purchased for the stay on the car park
  
• No parking notice was attached to vehicle or given in person on return to vehicle which the IPC Code of Conduct states must happen:
  

2.1 The Notice to the Driver must;


(a) Be in writing.


(b) Either be affixed to the vehicle or given to a person who appears to the


Operator to have control of that vehicle.


(c) Specify the vehicle and the land on which it was parked.


(d) Identify the period of parking to which the charge relates and the


circumstances by which the charge became payable.


(e) Describe the means by which the contract was brought to the attention of the


driver.


(f) Explain that the charges have not been paid in full and are the liability of the


driver.


(g) Explain that if the full amount of the charge is not paid within 28 days an


application will be made to DVLA for the keeper’s details to enable the charge


to be enforced.

• The first letter being Notice to Keeper was sent and was appealed explaining full situation and reason why driver was a few minutes late returning to vehicle due to a medical condition that is beyond their control. A reply was sent back from that appeal but the parking company was not interested in listening to the appeal and stated a ticket was not clearly displayed in the vehicle, but upon receiving photographic evidence it clearly shows the ticket on the dashboard and original ticket has been kept for evidence

• On www.bmpa.eu/companydata it states about:
  
  13 Grace periods
  
  13.1 Your approach to parking management must allow a
  driver who enters your car park but decides not to park,
  to leave the car park within a reasonable period without
  having their vehicle issued with a parking charge notice.
  
  13.2 You should allow the driver a reasonable ‘grace period’
  in which to decide if they are going to stay or go. If the
  driver is on your land without permission you should still
  allow them a grace period to read your signs and leave
  before you take enforcement action.
  
  13.3 You should be prepared to tell us the specific grace period
  at a site if our compliance team or our agents ask what it is.
  
  13.4 You should allow the driver a reasonable period to leave
  the private car park after the parking contract has ended,
  before you take enforcement action
  
  The ticket that was brought at 15.56 expired at 16.56 and the photo was taken at 16.57
  
• In order to issue parking charges, and to pursue unpaid charges via litigation, the

Claimant is required to have the written authority of the landowner, on whose behalf they are acting as an agent. No evidence of such authority has been supplied by the Claimant or their legal representatives, and the Claimant is put to strict proof of same, in the form of an unredacted and contemporaneous contract, or chain of authority, from the landowner to the Claimant.

• I would like the Court to take note that honesty was given and appeals were made and still I was being harassed by letter and all appeals were ignored.

• The allegation appears to be an 8 minute over stay and even the government state a grace period of 10 minutes is given on their land and car parks to prevent fines for just being a few minutes back to the vehicle
  
• The driver does not have a blue badge but clearly has a medical problem and even so The Equality Act 2010 says: A progressive condition is one that gets worse over time. People with progressive conditions can be classed as disabled.
  

Not all disabilities are visible, although, the drivers is underneath their clothes and not all disabilities are wheelchair bound and require a blue badge therefore companies need to realise this.

• The Court is invited to dismiss the Claim, and to allow such Defendant’s costs as are permissible under Civil Procedure Rule 27.14.
  
  

I believe the facts stated in this Defence Statement

are true.

...............................................................


.


...........................


(Defendant) (Date)

Cbella38

* In the actual text its in Times Roman text and font size 12