ParkingEye Claim Form Received

tboo

Tennessee_Tuxedo wrote: »

relating to an overstay in a retail car park,

CM is asking because you have stated in the OP the claim is for an overstay

So a little more bones is needed re evidence either mobility problems or a store manager statement

Quentin

The ws stage is too late to now also send another defence

See #2 in the newbies FAQ thread for advice on the ws

Tennessee_Tuxedo

Thanks tboo, that makes sense reading it back.

The issue I have (and I'm possibly getting myself a bit confused on this!) is that I haven't received any information at all from Parking Eye, I only know that the claim is for an overstay as that was on the County Court Claim form.

I mentioned earlier in the thread that I thought a purchase had been made from a store on the date of the claim but checked the receipt and it was a different day, so I'm struggling to build a defence as I have so little information to go from e.g I have no idea how long the overstay is claimed to be.

I haven't received anything from Parking Eye which is why I was hoping to rely more on their failure to provide information (e.g. no PCN, no cause of action or letter before claim) and failure to comply with POFA rather than basing it on the length of overstay. Am I heading in the wrong direction with this line of thinking?

KeithP

What response did you get to the email sent in posts #11,12,13?
Did you send that email in the name of the Defendant?

A Subject Access Request was suggested back in the second half of May.
What happened to that?

Tennessee_Tuxedo

The emails were sent in the defendant's name and from their email address. Two were sent (I would need to check the exact dates,) but no response was received to either.

Must admit I overlooked the SAR, guessing it's way too late to submit one at this point?

Coupon-mad

No it is never too late to issue a SAR and PE might be fairly quick to reply (at least it might come before the hearing), and it would be amusing if the evidence in the SAR doesn't match the evidence they supply for court. That'll be hard for their rep to explain!

For that reason, email PE NOW requesting a subject access request like you see in the other SAR threads here. Do it tonight or first thing in the morning if you can.

Tennessee_Tuxedo

Thanks Coupon Mad. I sent a subject access request this morning, so will update this thread when I hear anything.

In terms of my witness statement/skeleton defence, I was planning on expanding my original defence statement and basing it on the following points:

- Failure to comply with the previously applicable Practice Direction; Pre-Action Conduct (paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c)) and the new Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (paragraphs 3.1(a)-(d), 5.1 and 5.2)
- Failure to meet the Notice to Keeper obligations of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012
- Unclear terms
- No Locus Standi
- Data Protection Act and British Parking Association Code of Practice breach
- Unconscionable and unrecoverable inflation of the 'parking charge'

Essentially the defence is that PE have failed to provide sufficient information to allow me to submit a full defence and have failed to comply with statutory deadlines (e.g. failing to serve a Notice to Keeper by day 14 after the alleged incident). Is this likely to be an acceptable defence to the court?

nosferatu1001

Beware of "expanding"

A defence and a WS are two different beasts
A defence is the legal arguments
A WS is the facts

Notice how the two do not overlap!

You are confusing MULTIPLE terms, showing you need to reread post 2
You have
- defence (mandatory)
- witness statement plus other evidence (mandatory)
- skeleton ARGUMENT (optional, and is a SUMMARY of the claims failings ,the defences successes)

You cannot expand the previous defence, formally, with filing an application to do so, one the cliamant can (and will in PEs case) resist.

Le_Kirk

nosferatu1001 wrote: »

You cannot expand the previous defence, formally, without filing an application to do so, one the cliamant can (and will in PEs case) resist.

Did you mean without filing an application? Doesn't this involve a fee also?

nosferatu1001

Yes, I meant you cannot expand it without filing, and that attracts a fee - £255 as PE will objec,t menaing it needs ahearing.