AOS done, please can my defense be looked at?

parkingnewb

Hello,

I must admit in spite of my best efforts, I find the world of parking fines confusing still.

Here is my story briefly:
In April 2017 I was contracted by a company to do some work with them for about 24 hours. I was instructed to drive to the company's office where I signed contracts to work for them. The person who was in charge of our team told me to park in on of the parking bays which instructed that it was for company employees (which I was technically). We then drove off in his van to Wales and then Coventry where we did some work over the next couple of days. When I came back I was given a ticket by a parking company (not a council ticket, it is private land).

I responded to the letter at the time and said that I was in fact working for the company at the time and that this is ridiculous. Over the last year and a half have received various threats etc. etc. did not respond to anything else.

Now have received a Claim Form from the court dated 13 Aug 2018, filed AOS today 24 Aug 2018.

Here is my proposed defence, it is mostly copy pasted from others defences with points I thought applied:

---

Defence:

1. It is admitted that the Defendant is the registered keeper of the vehicle in question.

2. The defendant has no liability as they are the Keeper of the vehicle, and the Private Parking Company has failed to comply with the strict provisions of PoFA 2012 to hold anyone other than the driver liable for the charges.

3. The car park signage indicates that the area was reserved for Employees of (company) solely. The driver was doing contracted work for the company on this day and had the express permission of the company owner and my supervisor from the company to park in this space.

4. The reason for this parking company's presence on this site can only be for the sole purpose of deterring parking by uninvited persons, for the benefit of drivers authorised by the leaseholder businesses. Instead, contrary to various consumer laws, this Claimant carries out a predatory operation on those very people whose interests they are purportedly there to uphold.

5. The permission of the owner was granted to the driver of the vehicle to park his car there. He then travelled in the company’s van with his supervisor and did work for the company In a different location of the country over the next day. The work done was at a profit for the company and therefore did not result in any losses at all for the company.

6. In the Jopson appeal it was held that ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 had no application to a situation involving drivers with a right and expectation to be entitled to park under the grants flowing from a lease.

6(i) In the Jopson appeal it was also held that signs added later by a third party parking firm are of no consequence to authorised visitors to premises where other rights prevail and supersede any alleged new 'parking contract’.

7. 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 UK Parking Control Ltd and that they have a right to unilaterally remove or interfere with the overriding rights enjoyed by the lessee company and extended to permitted drivers who were expressly allowed on site.

8. Alternatively, even if there was a contract, the provision requiring payment of £250.80 is an unenforceable penalty clause.

9. Further and alternatively, the provision requiring payment of £250.80 is unenforceable as an unfair term contrary the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

10. This charge represents a breach of the well-known and well-established principle of promissory estoppel, i.e. that a promise is enforceable by law, even if made without formal consideration, when party A has made a promise to party B, who then relies on that promise to his subsequent detriment.

11. This charge represents a breach of the well-known and well-established principle that 'a grantor shall not derogate from his grant'. This rule embodies a general legal principle that, if A agrees to confer a benefit on B, then A should not do anything that substantially deprives B of the enjoyment of that benefit.

12. On the one hand the company staff verbally allowed access to the driver and directed where to park, to enable the driver to then commence work for the company. Landholders cannot allow or promise this on the one hand, then on the other hand, take away this permission or promise, in allowing a third party to disallow and/or seek to charge for the permitted action by a driver.

13. In 'Saeed v Plustrade Limited [2001] EWCA Civ 2011' a tenant was granted a right in common with others to park on such part of the forecourt as might from time to time be specified by the landholder, who later proposed to reduce the availability of parking and to charge for it. On appeal it was held that the landholder was only entitled to change the location of spaces, not to reduce their number, nor to unreasonably restrict parking previously offered, nor to charge for it. Such restrictions would interfere with easements enjoyed under the lease.


Statement of Truth:

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

parkingnewb

Edit: I realised I used at least one personal pronoun incorrectly in the defence and will fix that ("I").

The company is UK Car Park Management Limited.
Solicitors: Gladstones Solicitors Limited

Le_Kirk

parkingnewb wrote: »

Edit: I realised I used at least one personal pronoun incorrectly in the defence and will fix that ("I").

Good, I was going to point out that things happened to the DRIVER and you are defending as KEEPER, so well spotted.

parkingnewb

Yes this was now edited in the original post. Thanks!

KeithP

With a Claim Issue Date of 13th August, and the AoS done in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 17th September to file the Defence.

That's still three weeks away, plenty of time.


When you are happy with the content, the Defence should be filed via email as described here:

1) Print the Defence.
2) Sign it and date it.
3) Scan the signed document back in and save it as a pdf.
4) Send that pdf as an email attachment to CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk
5) Just put the claim number and the word Defence in the email title, and in the body of the email something like 'Please find my Defence attached'.
6) Log into MCOL after a few days to see if the Claim is marked "defended". If not, you should chase the CCBC until it is.
7) Wait for the Directions Questionnaire and come back here.

Coupon-mad

6. In the Jopson appeal it was held that ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 had no application to a situation involving drivers with a right and expectation to be entitled to park under the grants flowing from a lease.

6(i) In the Jopson appeal it was also held that signs added later by a third party parking firm are of no consequence to authorised visitors to premises where other rights prevail and supersede any alleged new 'parking contract’.

A local Judge will not know what you mean by 'the Jopson appeal' (it is not famous!).

In any case, bargepole has clarified when posting concise defences recently (and so has Southpaw on pepipoo forum) that a defence is not the place to cite case law or previous cases that are comparable - that comes at WS and evidence stage.

The person who was in charge of our team told me to park in on of the parking bays

Can you get a witness statement from that person for later on? (not needed with a defence). Would they attend a hearing with you?

parkingnewb

I sent my defence and it has been registered as received.

I received a letter from Gladstone "solictors" which includes the Directions Questionnaire filled out by them. They have stated that the case should be dealt with on papers and with no oral hearing. This is due to the fact that the matter is "relatively straightforward and the costs incurred by both parties for attending an oral hearing would be disproportionate."

They have elected not to mediate as "mediation has rarely proven beneficial in these types of cases".
They also mention that they would be happy to listen to any genuine payment proposals that I wish to put forward.

---

I have also received now a Notice of Proposed Allocation to the Small Claims Track from the court themselves. So I need to fill this out.

Here is my basic understanding of this form point by point:

A, Settlement/Mediation : Asks if I agree to the case being referrred to Small Claims Mediation Service. I should put yes or no?

Do I agree that the small claims track is the appropriate track for this case I suppose I put yes?

Hearing venue The solicitors of the parking company requested that it be done by letter.

Expert advice Do I want the court's permission to use the written evidence of an expert? I think not as I don't have such a thing.

bargepole

parkingnewb wrote: »

I sent my defence and it has been registered as received.

I received a letter from Gladstone "solictors" which includes the Directions Questionnaire filled out by them. They have stated that the case should be dealt with on papers and with no oral hearing. This is due to the fact that the matter is "relatively straightforward and the costs incurred by both parties for attending an oral hearing would be disproportionate."

They have elected not to mediate as "mediation has rarely proven beneficial in these types of cases".
They also mention that they would be happy to listen to any genuine payment proposals that I wish to put forward.

---

I have also received now a Notice of Proposed Allocation to the Small Claims Track from the court themselves. So I need to fill this out.

Here is my basic understanding of this form point by point:

A, Settlement/Mediation : Asks if I agree to the case being referrred to Small Claims Mediation Service. I should put yes or no?

Do I agree that the small claims track is the appropriate track for this case I suppose I put yes?

Hearing venue The solicitors of the parking company requested that it be done by letter.

Expert advice Do I want the court's permission to use the written evidence of an expert? I think not as I don't have such a thing.

The answers to all of these questions are linked in post #2 of the Newbies thread, and having burnt the midnight oil to produce a complete step-by-step guide to the Court process, I'm not going to repeat it here.

It's like Groundhog Day on this forum.