We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Please help with statement of defense
Options
Kezza15
Posts: 27 Forumite
Hi All,
I'm new to this so please bear with me
I received a PCN 31/01/17 for "failing to display a valid ticket". I appealed this with ES Parking and then, stupidly it would now appear after doing some research, I appealed to IAS. I have since had a LBC and now a Court Claim Form. The charges have increased from the original £100 (£60 if paid within 14 days) to now being £236.51.
Background of why I got the ticket: I parked on Winwick Street in Warrington, I drove in the entrance, stopped at first pay machine as I was running late for work then drove and found a space. Unbeknown to me there are 2 car parks joined together and I have ended up parking in an ES Parking one but paid for my ticket in a council one. There were no barriers and no signs to say i was entering an ES PArking car park. I have photos of my ticket dispayed in car and also of the route i drove to park. They have dismissed my appeal saying there is adequate signage!
After the second appeal was dismissed I actually sent a cheque for the original £60 (while I didn't agree I didn't want to end up with debt collectors knocking) then I received the LBC. I phoned Gladstones and they said they would look into whether the cheque had been received an everything was on hold until I got a call back. 2 weeks later after no call on either landline or mobile I received the court claim form. When I called them again I was told I must have given them the wrong phone number as they tried and it didn't work so now it must go through the court claim from.
I have used a template from here to draft a statement of defence. Any tips or help would be much appreciated. Sorry for long winded post.
Statement of Defence
I am XXXXX, defendant in this matter and deny liability for the entirety of the claim for the following
reasons:
(1)
The claimant has not provided enough details in the particulars of claim to file a full defence.
In particular, the full details of the contract which it is alleged was broken have not been provided.
a) The Claimant has disclosed no cause of action to give rise to any debt.
b) The Claimant has stated that a parking charge was incurred.
c) The Claimant has given no indication of the nature of the alleged charge in the Particulars of Claim.
The Claimant has therefore disclosed no cause of action.
d) The Particulars of Claim contains no details and fails to establish a cause of action which would enable
the Defendant to prepare a specific defence.
It just states “parking charges” which does not give any indication of on what basis the claim is brought.
There is no information regarding why the charge arose, what the original charge was, what the alleged
contract was nor anything which could be considered a fair exchange of information.
The Particulars of Claim are incompetent in disclosing no cause of action.
e) On the 20th September 2016 another relevant poorly pleaded private parking charge claim by
Gladstones was struck out by District Judge Cross of St Albans County Court without a hearing
due to their ‘roboclaim’ particulars being incoherent, failing to comply with CPR. 16.4 and
‘providing no facts that could give rise to any apparent claim in law’
f) On the 19th Audust 2016 DJ Anson sitting at Preston County Court ruled that the very similar
parking charge particulars of claim were deficient and failing to meet CPR 16.4 and PD 16
paragraphs 7.3 - 7.5. He ordered the Claimant in that case to file new particulars which they failed
to do, and the court confirmed the claim will now be struck out.
(2)
The defendant wrote to the claimant on xxxxx asking for:
i) Full particulars of the parking charges
ii) Who the party was that contracted with ES Parking.
Iii) The full legal identity of the landowner
iv) A full copy of the contract with the landholder that demonstrated that ES Parking had their authority.
v) If the charges were based on damages for breach of contract and if so to provide justification of
this sum
vi) If the charge was based on a contractually agreed sum for the provision of parking and If so to
provide a valid VAT invoice for this 'service'.
vii) To provide a copy of the signs that ES Parking can evidence were on site and which contended
formed a contract with the driver on that occasion, as well as all photographs taken of the
vehicle in question.
(3)
ES Parking Enforcements are not the lawful occupier of the land. I have the reasonable belief that they
do not have the authority to issue charges on this land in their own name and that they have no rights to
bring this case.
a) The Claimant is not the landowner and is merely an agent acting on behalf of the landowner and has
failed to demonstrate their legal standing to form a contract.
b) The claimant is not the landowner and suffers no loss whatsoever as a result of a vehicle parking at the
location in question
c) The Claimant is put to proof that it has sufficient interest in the land or that there are specific terms in its
contract to bring an action on its own behalf. As a third party agent, the Claimant may not pursue any
charge. I have the reasonable belief that they do not have the authority to issue charges on this land in
their own name and that they have no right to bring action regarding this claim.
(4)
a) The Claimant has at no time provided an explanation how the sum has been calculated, the conduct
that gave rise to it or how the amount has climbed from £100 to £150. This appears to be an added cost
with apparently no qualification and an attempt at double recovery, which the POFA Schedule 4
specifically disallows.
b) The Protection of Freedom Act Para 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the
keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper.
(5)
The signage was inadequate to form a contract with the motorist
a) there was no signage at all that I was entering a car park managed by ES parking from the direction which I entered.
(6)
(a) The Claimant has sent threatening and misleading demands which stated that further debt recovery
action would be taken to recover what is owed by passing the debt to a ‘local’ recovery agent (which
suggested to the Defendant they would be calling round like bailiffs) adding further unexplained
charges of £25 to the original £100 with no evidence of how this extra charge has been calculated.
No figure for additional charges was 'agreed' nor could it have formed part of the alleged
'contract' because no such indemnity costs were quantified on the signs.
Terms cannot be bolted on later with figures plucked out of thin air, as if they were
incorporated into the small print when they were not.
b) The Defendant also disputes that the Claimant has incurred £50 solicitor costs.
c) The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant has not incurred £50 costs to pursue an
alleged £100 debt.
d) Not withstanding the Defendant's belief, the costs are in any case not recoverable.
e) The Claimant described the charge of £50.00 "legal fees" not "contractual costs".
CPR 27.14 does not permit these to be recovered in the Small Claims Court.
The defendant therefore asks that the court orders the case to be struck out for want of a detailed
course of action and/or for the claim as having no prospect of success.
I believe the facts stated in this defence are true.
(Name) (Signature) (Date)!
Kerry
I'm new to this so please bear with me
I received a PCN 31/01/17 for "failing to display a valid ticket". I appealed this with ES Parking and then, stupidly it would now appear after doing some research, I appealed to IAS. I have since had a LBC and now a Court Claim Form. The charges have increased from the original £100 (£60 if paid within 14 days) to now being £236.51.
Background of why I got the ticket: I parked on Winwick Street in Warrington, I drove in the entrance, stopped at first pay machine as I was running late for work then drove and found a space. Unbeknown to me there are 2 car parks joined together and I have ended up parking in an ES Parking one but paid for my ticket in a council one. There were no barriers and no signs to say i was entering an ES PArking car park. I have photos of my ticket dispayed in car and also of the route i drove to park. They have dismissed my appeal saying there is adequate signage!
After the second appeal was dismissed I actually sent a cheque for the original £60 (while I didn't agree I didn't want to end up with debt collectors knocking) then I received the LBC. I phoned Gladstones and they said they would look into whether the cheque had been received an everything was on hold until I got a call back. 2 weeks later after no call on either landline or mobile I received the court claim form. When I called them again I was told I must have given them the wrong phone number as they tried and it didn't work so now it must go through the court claim from.
I have used a template from here to draft a statement of defence. Any tips or help would be much appreciated. Sorry for long winded post.
Statement of Defence
I am XXXXX, defendant in this matter and deny liability for the entirety of the claim for the following
reasons:
(1)
The claimant has not provided enough details in the particulars of claim to file a full defence.
In particular, the full details of the contract which it is alleged was broken have not been provided.
a) The Claimant has disclosed no cause of action to give rise to any debt.
b) The Claimant has stated that a parking charge was incurred.
c) The Claimant has given no indication of the nature of the alleged charge in the Particulars of Claim.
The Claimant has therefore disclosed no cause of action.
d) The Particulars of Claim contains no details and fails to establish a cause of action which would enable
the Defendant to prepare a specific defence.
It just states “parking charges” which does not give any indication of on what basis the claim is brought.
There is no information regarding why the charge arose, what the original charge was, what the alleged
contract was nor anything which could be considered a fair exchange of information.
The Particulars of Claim are incompetent in disclosing no cause of action.
e) On the 20th September 2016 another relevant poorly pleaded private parking charge claim by
Gladstones was struck out by District Judge Cross of St Albans County Court without a hearing
due to their ‘roboclaim’ particulars being incoherent, failing to comply with CPR. 16.4 and
‘providing no facts that could give rise to any apparent claim in law’
f) On the 19th Audust 2016 DJ Anson sitting at Preston County Court ruled that the very similar
parking charge particulars of claim were deficient and failing to meet CPR 16.4 and PD 16
paragraphs 7.3 - 7.5. He ordered the Claimant in that case to file new particulars which they failed
to do, and the court confirmed the claim will now be struck out.
(2)
The defendant wrote to the claimant on xxxxx asking for:
i) Full particulars of the parking charges
ii) Who the party was that contracted with ES Parking.
Iii) The full legal identity of the landowner
iv) A full copy of the contract with the landholder that demonstrated that ES Parking had their authority.
v) If the charges were based on damages for breach of contract and if so to provide justification of
this sum
vi) If the charge was based on a contractually agreed sum for the provision of parking and If so to
provide a valid VAT invoice for this 'service'.
vii) To provide a copy of the signs that ES Parking can evidence were on site and which contended
formed a contract with the driver on that occasion, as well as all photographs taken of the
vehicle in question.
(3)
ES Parking Enforcements are not the lawful occupier of the land. I have the reasonable belief that they
do not have the authority to issue charges on this land in their own name and that they have no rights to
bring this case.
a) The Claimant is not the landowner and is merely an agent acting on behalf of the landowner and has
failed to demonstrate their legal standing to form a contract.
b) The claimant is not the landowner and suffers no loss whatsoever as a result of a vehicle parking at the
location in question
c) The Claimant is put to proof that it has sufficient interest in the land or that there are specific terms in its
contract to bring an action on its own behalf. As a third party agent, the Claimant may not pursue any
charge. I have the reasonable belief that they do not have the authority to issue charges on this land in
their own name and that they have no right to bring action regarding this claim.
(4)
a) The Claimant has at no time provided an explanation how the sum has been calculated, the conduct
that gave rise to it or how the amount has climbed from £100 to £150. This appears to be an added cost
with apparently no qualification and an attempt at double recovery, which the POFA Schedule 4
specifically disallows.
b) The Protection of Freedom Act Para 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the
keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper.
(5)
The signage was inadequate to form a contract with the motorist
a) there was no signage at all that I was entering a car park managed by ES parking from the direction which I entered.
(6)
(a) The Claimant has sent threatening and misleading demands which stated that further debt recovery
action would be taken to recover what is owed by passing the debt to a ‘local’ recovery agent (which
suggested to the Defendant they would be calling round like bailiffs) adding further unexplained
charges of £25 to the original £100 with no evidence of how this extra charge has been calculated.
No figure for additional charges was 'agreed' nor could it have formed part of the alleged
'contract' because no such indemnity costs were quantified on the signs.
Terms cannot be bolted on later with figures plucked out of thin air, as if they were
incorporated into the small print when they were not.
b) The Defendant also disputes that the Claimant has incurred £50 solicitor costs.
c) The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant has not incurred £50 costs to pursue an
alleged £100 debt.
d) Not withstanding the Defendant's belief, the costs are in any case not recoverable.
e) The Claimant described the charge of £50.00 "legal fees" not "contractual costs".
CPR 27.14 does not permit these to be recovered in the Small Claims Court.
The defendant therefore asks that the court orders the case to be struck out for want of a detailed
course of action and/or for the claim as having no prospect of success.
I believe the facts stated in this defence are true.
(Name) (Signature) (Date)!
Kerry
0
Comments
-
Please can anyone help with this?0
-
You need to add your facts as you told us (put this near the top). The Judge will need to know all this:Background of why I got the ticket: I parked on Winwick Street in Warrington, I drove in the entrance, stopped at first pay machine as I was running late for work then drove and found a space. Unbeknown to me there are 2 car parks joined together and I have ended up parking in an ES Parking one but paid for my ticket in a council one. There were no barriers and no signs to say i was entering an ES PArking car park. I have photos of my ticket dispayed in car and also of the route i drove to park. They have dismissed my appeal saying there is adequate signage!
After the second appeal was dismissed I actually sent a cheque for the original £60 (while I didn't agree I didn't want to end up with debt collectors knocking) then I received the LBC. I phoned Gladstones and they said they would look into whether the cheque had been received an everything was on hold until I got a call back. 2 weeks later after no call on either landline or mobile I received the court claim form. When I called them again I was told I must have given them the wrong phone number as they tried and it didn't work so now it must go through the court claim from.
You must ask you bank if that cheque was cashed or not. If you didn't note the cheque number, ask the Bank to search for a cheque of £60 around those months being presented for debit against your account.PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
CLICK at the top or bottom of any page where it says:
Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD0 -
Thanks so much.
I have the cheque stub and was going to call today to cancel it. They haven't cashed it so far.
Can I just use the wording as I have in here for what happened or does it need to sound more like legal speak?
Also do you think I have a chance of winning?
Thanks again 👍🏼0 -
Kezza15 I am monitoring your thread closely as Interested to where it leads.
hope you can take heart from the fact people are trying to help you fight against injustice.0 -
Thanks Claxtome. Really hope you are successful. What stage are you at now? Do you have a thread on here?0
-
I am just about to post off my defence.
I take it you have submmitted an "Acknowledgement of Service" as per suggested in NEWBIE "Small Claim" post #2 to extend the time to 28 days before sending in your defence.
Yes my thread is on here if you look carefully.0 -
Yes I did that a couple of days ago, thanks I'll have a read through now.0
-
I have just taken these guys on and won, things to note
1. The maximum fine if you lost in court was £225 so its worth the fight
2. They dropped out the day before the court appearance
3. Gladstones own the IPC, worth digging up on the interent and using as evidence
4. The have upheld appealed previous PCN again there are references on the internet allowing you to quite the PCN numbers
5. Canterbury council amongst others are currently refunding millions of pounds of fines for "flipped" tickets on the basis that you cannot control what happens to a non adhesive ticket if you are away from the vehicle. Articles available online
6. The ticket is valid because it has a valid ticket number on both sides
7. The tickets are so flimsy you can see through them
8. If you live somewhere else in the country apply to have the case moved to a local court so that it becomes uneconomical for them to travel
Hope this helps. Basically stand up and fight them, in my case they backed down before getting to court and incurred the court costs.0 -
Thank you Bsheer. I've had an email from Gladstones saying they are proceeding with the claim but I'm not going to act on that, instead I'm waiting until I receive it from the court. Glad you had a good outcome.0
-
If you live somewhere else in the country apply to have the case moved to a local court so that it becomes uneconomical for them to travel.
A consumer doesn't have to 'apply' to have the case moved.
It automatically goes to the consumer's choice of court, when sued by some random bullyboy company connected to the private parking *industry*. As always, I hope they are proud.PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
CLICK at the top or bottom of any page where it says:
Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.6K Spending & Discounts
- 244K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177K Life & Family
- 257.4K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards