UK Car Park Management Ltd court claim

Sistema_2

Hi, I'm new here but I was hoping to get some help. You already provide a lot of information but I'd still appreciate some advise. I live in UK but English is not my native language and I am struggling a bit with the ''law language''.

The situation is as follows:

UK Car Park Management Ltd. has a contract with the Housing for a residential parking. This parking is situated by my workplace and that is where staff, clients and visitors of clients are parking there. We are provided with parking permits which we fill by ourselves. We can only fill one permit for each day, never in advance.

On 14/11/2016 I received a letter from Debt Recovery Plus Ltd telling me that the parking charge was issued on 12/09/2016 and it's the FIRST letter I ever received about that PCN.
Fact is that I moved in October 2016 but I updated my address with DVLA on time so I believe it's not my fault that UK Car Park Management didn't receive a response from me at first. Therefore, I've never received an original PCN.

In that first letter they explained to me that they ''utilised a tracing service which has provided the above new address as your most current address''. << do they mean DVLA or something else? Is it even legal? Can I use it in my defence?

My employer was complaining to the Housing but with no satisfying result.

At that time I only knew what was the issue date (12/09/2016), for a very long time and after few of my replies that on the issue date I was not working so my vehicle was not parked there, they told me that event date is 09/09/2016. I was there on that day and I had a permit. Their argument is that my permit wasn't valid and they provided me with photographs. They show the permit, with the valid date so am I to understand that they just don't like my handwriting? Official reason for issue is 'invalid permit'.

In some of the letters they say that I was parked on 12/09/2016 so every time I received a letter they were giving me different information...

Also, on letters they often claim that I'm not responding to them which is not true. I sent e-mails and letters and I have copies of all of them.

Right now Gladstone is dealing with this.

I received a claim form with issue date 4th Dec 2017 from County Court Business Centre in Northampton. I acknowledged service and left the defence box empty as advised on a Newbies thread. If I understood correctly from that day I have now 33 days to prepare my defence.

I started writing my defence by looking at some threads here and I'm posting it here in hope that someone here will be kind enough to advise me and correct me if there are any mistakes. I'd be very grateful for that.
_________________


DEFENCE STATEMENT

I assert that I am not liable to the Claimant for the sum claimed, or any amount, for the following reasons:

1. It is acknowledged that the defendant, xxx, residing at xxx is the registered keeper of the vehicle.

2. It is denied that any "parking charges" as stated on the Particulars of claim are owed and any debt is denied in it's entirety.

3. The Defendant has prepared the defence on the assumption that the alleged parking contraventions are in reference to occasions whereby the Defendant’s vehicle was parked in an allocated, residential parking space with a valid parking permit at the work place of the Defendant.

4. The Defendant has no liability as they are the keeper of the vehicle and the Claimant has failed to comply with the strict provisions of POFA 2012 to hold anyone other than the driver liable for the charges.

a) The driver has not been evidenced on any occasion.

b) There is no presumption in law that the keeper was the driver and nor is the keeper obliged to name the driver to a private parking firm. This was confirmed in the Parking on Private Land Appeals (POPLA) Annual Report 2015 by the POPLA Lead Adjudicator and barrister, Henry Greenslade, when explaining the POFA 2012 principles of ‘keeper liability’ as set out in Schedule 4.

5. The Claimant’s solicitors are not sure themselves what is the incident date as in a writing correspondence they claim two different dates. It proves that Claimant's solicitors issue claims with no due diligence, no scrutiny of details nor even checking for a true cause of action.!
I believe the term for such conduct is ‘robo-claims’ which is against the public interest, demonstrates a disregard for the dignity of the court and is unfair on unrepresented consumers.

6. In the pre court stage the Claimant’s solicitor provided photographs I requested in order to defend myself against the alleged debt. The photographs show my vehicle parked with a visible and properly filled temporary parking permit for the date 09/09/2016. The Claim form Particulars were extremely sparse and divulged no cause of action nor sufficient detail. Even though the Claimant presented photographs I have little idea what the claim is about - why the charge arose, what the alleged contract was;
nothing that could be considered a fair exchange of information.

7. The Claimant failed to provide charge notice. The first correspondence dated 14/11/2016 I received was from the Debt Collectors claiming that the Claimant received no response from me. Claimant could not receive a response because of the wrong, not current, address which was not my fault.

8. I suggest that parking companies using the small claims track as a form of aggressive, automated debt collection is not something the courts should be seen to support.

9. The defendant denies the claim in its entirety voiding any liability to the claimant for all amounts claimed due to the aforementioned reasons.
It is submitted that the conduct of the Claimant is wholly unreasonable and vexatious.

10. I request the court strike out this claim for the reasons stated above, and for similar reasons cited by District Judge Cross of St Albans County Court on 20/09/16 where a similar claim was struck out without a hearing, due to Gladstones' template particulars for a private parking firm being 'incoherent', failing to comply with CPR16.4, and ''providing no facts that could give rise to any apparent claim in law''.

Statement of Truth: I confirm that the contents of this statement are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

bargepole

You have clearly copied that from an out of date template you found somewhere, and included some points which are not relevant to your case, You have also mixed paragraphs written in the first and third person. You have a strong case based on the fact that you did have a valid permit, so in this case it would be better to make it clear that you were the driver, and not try to hide behind any POFA deficiencies.

Here is what I suggest. You can embellish it later at the Witness Statement stage.

IN THE COUNTY COURT BUSINESS CENTRE

CLAIM No. DXXXXXXX

BETWEEN

UK CAR PARK MANAGEMENT LTD (CLAIMANT)

-and-

SISTEMA (DEFENDANT)

________
DEFENCE
________

1. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed, or any amount at all.

2. The Claimant's sparse Particulars do not disclose any cause of action which could give rise to a claim, but offer a menu of choices. As such, they do not comply with the requirements of Civil Procedure Rule 16.4

3. The Defendant has received previous correspondence from the Claimant, suggesting that a 'parking charge' was owed, due to a failure to display a valid permit.

4. The Defendant denies that the vehicle was parked in the material location on the material date, or at any other time, without a valid permit, and the photographs previously sent by the Claimant are clear evidence of this fact.

5. On the material date, the Defendant's car was parked in a residential car park adjacent to the Defendant's workplace, in accordance with an arrangement made between the Defendant's employer and the car park owner. Such parking is subject to the display of a permit, on which employees are required to handwrite their vehicle details on a daily basis. The Claimant's own evidence will show that this requirement was fully complied with.

6. In light of the foregoing, it is submitted that the Claimant has no cause of action, and has no evidence that the Defendant was in breach of any contractual terms, whether expressly, by conduct, or at all.

I believe that the facts contained in this Defence are true.

Signature

Date

Coupon-mad

Their argument is that my permit wasn't valid and they provided me with photographs.

They show the permit, with the valid date so am I to understand that they just don't like my handwriting?

LOL!

Go with bargepole's concise defence.

Be ready for the usual letter from Gladstones, next, with the blank 'no hearing' N159 attached (please don't ask about that, which is covered on every Gladstones thread). The NEWBIES thread tells you to fill out only a court-obtained N180, to state the local court where you want your hearing, and it explains which boxes to tick.

Come back in 2018 as soon as you have a court date, because you will need assistance to get your witness statement and evidence sorted out.

Sistema_2

Thank you, your help is very much appreciated. And your reply was so quick, thank you for that too!

I went with the defence bargepole wrote, thank you again.

So now I wait for the next steps, I'll post here later.