PCN from ES Parking Enforcement

nosferatu1001

Nop, you just state you had no liability with the parkign charge, so why would you engage with them? There is no requirement in law fo ryou to do so.

Its a response to a LBA. Dont ecpect them to read it, and dont expect them to stop with the next step, which is issuing a claim. So get reading on the small claims process - newbie thread.

northernt01

Right so this has moved on further now,
a county court claim form has been received (as expected)
and the acknowledgment of service has been completed as per the instructions on the newbies thread and
now i'm currently in the process of stringing together and writing a defense.
I believe this may be a tricky one to defend.
the pcn was for parking in a permit only space that was not designated to anyone other than the office it's in front of i.e there was no permit for the car and i'm not even sure if one could be obtained. my main question would be would it be better to defend as 'the driver' if its known who that was? if they had confronted the person issuing the PCN and politely offered to move the car to avoid all this. there would be a witness to this too that could support this and possibly photographic evidence

Any help would be appreciated thanks

claxtome

I am sorry I can't answer your latest question. Hopefully someone else can.

Would I would say - like NORTHWESTITCONSULTANCY I too have been fighting ESPEL for almost a year. It went to court last week and I won. I am not a great fan of them and I am willing to help where I can. (Subscribed to your thread so will get emailed when new posts occur).

Also I am not 100% sure but think the new regulations which came in at the beginning of the month may mean you can get ESPEL to be forced to give better particulars.

For specimen defences I suggest you look at newbie thread AND search using key words for threads from this year only.
(Your case is very different to mine so maybe not the best place to look for a defence.)

Umkomaas

Also I am not 100% sure but think the new regulations which came in at the beginning of the month may mean you can get ESPEL to be forced to give better particulars.

Here’s more detail on the new Pre-Action Protocol (PAP).

https://www.hilldickinson.com/insights/articles/new-pre-action-protocol-debt-claims

http://www.lpc-law.co.uk/news/latest-news/2017/april/pre-action-protocol-for-debt-claims/

northernt01

So if the claim form was submitted after the new rules came in can i force the new Pre-Action Protocol on them even if I've acknowledged service?

Umkomaas

northernt01 wrote: »

So if the claim form was submitted after the new rules came in can i force the new Pre-Action Protocol on them even if I've acknowledged service?

If you’ve read the links above, you now know as much as me.

northernt01

Can't see anything to suggest that i can, so i will crack on with my defense.
i can't seem to find any recent cases that were defended as the 'driver' or is it
best to defend as the registered keeper?

Umkomaas

Always as the RK, unless the driver has already been identified.

Redx

"driver" defences dont have any POFA2012 or NTK issues listed

all the other legal points would be valid however

claxtome

Now I have read up on the new 'particulars' procedure and think it only applies at the 'Letter before Claim' stage LBC. Therefore it would only apply if the LBC came after Oct 1st 2017. ( Which obviously means the new procedure won't apply for your case).
Please can another member confirm / deny if the claim form was submitted after the new rules came in can the defendant force the new Pre-Action Protocol on them even if they've acknowledged service?

I have just re-read you whole thread and have a couple of questions which may help your defence depending on answers->

1) I haven't seen you mention that you received a NTK. Did you receive one?
(If you did can you post a link to a redacted (version where sensitive data is blocked out) - can host it on Dropbox or various other cloud services)

If they had confronted the person issuing the PCN and politely offered to move the car to avoid all this. there would be a witness to this too that could support this and possibly photographic evidence

2) Did this happen or were you just suggesting it could?