Link Parking LTD are at it again, do I pay?

Le_Kirk

AOS is the acceptance of service and it should be explained on the papers you received. Doing this gives you additional time to prepare defence. Missing the deadline leaves you open to a judgement!
ETA: just seen beaten to it again by Umkomaas; didn't check the page 2!

jamieh1985

Thanks Keith. I actually can't seem to login to file my defence as I registered on Friday and the ID generated is on the work machine. Dogh I registered again and the Claim No. and password provided are no longer valid it seems. Which is rather annoying.

Anyway, the defence is given in post #18. I don't really know what more I can say on the matter tbh. Looking through the template I had to remove everything else as I didn't think it was relevant.

But if you guys think that is a solid defence I will get this filed first thing Monday then call up straight away.

Issue Date: 01 May 2018

KeithP

jamieh1985 wrote: »

I actually can't seem to login to file my defence as I registered on Friday and the ID generated is on the work machine. Dogh I registered again and the Claim No. and password provided are no longer valid it seems. Which is rather annoying.

Phew!! That's a lucky escape.

If you had read Bargepole's walkthrough linked from the NEWBIES FAQ, you would've seen:

Do NOT put anything in the 'Defence and Counterclaim' text box, not even a full stop.

The reason being it destroys any formatting and makes it difficult for a judge to read.

As you cannot do the AoS (I told you what that stood for last Thursday), it is most important that your Defence is filed today.

At the moment, I think your Defence needs some improvement.
Just one example, you have mentioned nothing about inadequate signage.

Have you looked at any of the sample Defences linked from post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ thread?

Once you are satisfied with the content -
1) print your Defence
2) sign it
3) scan the signed document back in and save as a pdf.
4) send that pdf as an email attachment to CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk

Then, as I said on Friday:

You should now check whether that CCJ has been awarded.
Ring the CCBC first thing on Tuesday to find out.

...and when you phone the CCBC on Tuesday ask them to confirm receipt of your Defence.

jamieh1985

Guys, thank you so much for sorting this crap for me. I've no idea if its the dyslexia or similar that makes that newbies thread so confusion for me, but there is so much going on that I just can't get my head round it.

So again thank you.

I've submitted my AOS and now I will check if there is a CCJ against me. I imagine there is nothing I can do if that is the case other than pay it. But if that is the case, I can only blame myself

jamieh1985

I'm just putting together some more information for my case. I've hunted down the signage issue and will add to my defence.

Here is the street in question. I am parked exactly as the blue car is in the link: https://goo.gl/maps/Ps4mbmD6RdK2

Here is a link to the sign in question:
https://imgur.com/a/QGxg938

I'll add the following to my defence also:

The signage is not of a good enough size to afford motorists the chance to read and understand the terms and conditions before deciding to remain in the car park. [...] In addition the operators signs would not be clearly visible from a parking space on Bathurst Square.

A question if I may. Could the fact I was parked on Bathurst Square and the ticket says I was parked Location: Lawrence Sq mean anything for it being an invalid ticket?

KeithP

If you intend to file your Defence today, you have less than one hour to do so.

I thought you were going to file it yesterday?

You seem to be drifting in to a default County Court Judgment against you.



That sign is on the other side of the road. There doesn't appear to be a sign relating to the side that your car was parked.
The '£100' charge certainly is not prominent on that sign.

jamieh1985

I couldn't file it yesterday as I didn't have my ID. I also didn't want to file it as I didn't think it was good enough.

So if you do have time, I'd love your help. I certainly have a tendency to avoid things that I don't understand which does gets me in trouble. But I am crossing my fingers that this isn't too late.

Defence:
1. It is admitted that Defendant is the registered keeper of the vehicle in question
2. The vehicle is claimed to be parked in Lawrence Square. When there is no street/road by this name.
4. The signage is not of a good enough size to afford motorists the chance to read and understand the terms and conditions before deciding to remain in the car park. In addition the operators signs are not be clear to which bays/area of the road they are referring to on Bathurst Square.
5. It is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. The proper Claimant is the landowner. Strict proof is required that there is a chain of contracts leading from the landowner to Link Parking Ltd. The claimant is unable to re-offer a contract to park on more onerous terms that those already specified in the lease, which grants an easement/ right to park for everyone and an entitlement to peaceful enjoyment.
6. The provision is a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss for the following reasons:
(i) As the Claimant is not the landowner and suffers no loss whatsoever as a result of a vehicle parking at the locations in question
(ii) The amount claimed is a charge and evidently disproportionate to any loss suffered by the Claimant and is therefore unconscionable;
(iii) The penalty bears no relation to the circumstances as the car was not parked in one of the residents parking areas.
(iiii) The clause is specifically expressed to be a parking charge on the Claimant's current signs.
7. Statement of Truth:
I confirm that the contents of this statement are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Quentin

To see if you already have a default ccj registered against you check at the registry trust website

KeithP

jamieh1985 wrote: »

I couldn't file it yesterday as I didn't have my ID.

You don't need an ID to file a Defence.

Remember yesterday, in post #24, the guidance was to file your Defence as a email attachment, and not to try and file it via MCOL.

jamieh1985

Ah, yes Keith. But rather I should have stressed that I wasn't comfortable sending it before I got the approval from you guys first. Seeing as I can only do it once.

Thanks Quentin... I will check now. I did call the Court today but was on hold for 40mins and then my lunch break was over and had to go back to work.