Parking awareness PCN issued BW legal claim form HELP!

Dwilkes2

Thank you for the reply's.

No the keeper was not the driver it was a named driver on the insurance that received the PCN. I have asked my mother if she has received a notice to keeper letter and she seems to think she has but she has disposed of this along with the other letters she has received.

This morning I actually visited where the PCN was issued and picked up on couple of things. it is a business with a small tarmacked area outside that would fit possibly 4-5 parking bays I say this as there are no parking bays actually marked out and the signs reads the following:

Parking is permitted for:
Vehicles fully displaying a valid permit and parked fully within the confines of a marked bay.
Pre-authorized vehicles parked fully within the confines of an allocated parking bay.

is this something I can use? as there are no marked parking bays?

Also I noticed the one sign they have is next to the businesses entrance door and is only 2.5ft of the ground. This sign could of been easily covered by another car or van at the time the named driver parked there. Also am I right in thinking that the marked parking bays they refer to on the sign should have a sign at the start of the bays and at the end?

Please note the pictures taken by PAS show the car and sign in the same picture but this surely doesn't mean at the time the vehicle parked there was no obstruction in the way of the sign?

I am going to assist my mother today with AOS online. I need to write up a defence so would love someone to help me & let me know if I can use the pints above as my defence.

Thanks Again

System

s this something I can use? as there are no marked parking bays?

No unless the issue was that they were authorised and tried to park in a bay. As you describe it the driver had no authorisation to be there.

Please note the pictures taken by PAS show the car and sign in the same picture

That'll be the problem as the driver can't claim not to have seen the sign.

Can you get a pic of the wording of the sign as that is the "contract"

Dwilkes2

No that is correct there was no authorisation to park there. I did think that with the sign but can it not be argued Z sign is that low and when the named driver parked it was covered up by another vehicle?

I didn't think to take a picture sorry but I remember it stating "you agree to pay consideration in the form of a parking charge in the sum of £100.00, to be paid within 28 days of issue. This is reduced to £60.00 if paid within 14 days. This along with what I quoted from the sign on my last post was visible then there was very small printed text underneath.

I'm starting to think I don't have anything to defend this claim with now?
Please Help!! I don't want my mother having to pay ridiculous amount of money.

Coupon-mad

Why are you still flailing & wanting help that you do not need, you have it!

I told you this:

follow the advice, and win their defended case. Some 99% win rate since 2017 on this forum; you cannot get better.

As it's your Mum's case, the Acknowledgement of Service must be done in her name (not yours) on MCOL as per the easy to follow pictorial link in the NEWBIES thread post #2.

Then you read some similar defences (stop spinning round and just click on the example defences, they ARE like this case). There are short defences by bargepole and longer ones by me, and one by Johnersh which show you the style of writing and headings, and ending, for her defence.

Easier than you might think once you read the NEWBIES thread post #2.

and IamEmanresu told you this:

Also the key bit of paper will be the Notice to Keeper. If she doesn't have it, then she sends a Subject Access Request to PAS for that detail and get proof of posting. They have 30 days. Be aware though that PAS are difficult to contact so use the address they have given the ICO here

https://ico.org.uk/ESDWebPages/Entry/Z2829467

If no reply after 30 days, then another letter giving 7 days then a complaint to the ICO

At the same time you have to keep to the court timescale.

The specific defence you are looking for on here is one where

1. The Keeper was not the driver
2. The signs were unclear or to a driver
3. The Claimant's paperwork failed to meet the requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

There are a lot of "defences" thrown around on here but the defendant has to be specific and answer the issue of it was not a pre authorised vehicle. And why the driver missed the signs.

I have no idea why you are in a state, when that sets out what to do.

System

I'm starting to think I don't have anything to defend this claim with now?

Are you the defendant? It appears you are not as you have said

the claim against my mother.

The defendant has a defence which has already been set out above

1. The Keeper was not the driver
2. The signs were unclear or wording unclear to a driver
3. The Claimant's paperwork failed to meet the requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

1 and 3 are relevant. 2 is a possibility but 1 and 3 should do it.

Dwilkes2

I have read what you guys have said & I have now completed the AOS in my mothers name of course.

I appreciate what you are saying but seriously the defence for my mother is

1. the keeper is not the driver
2. The claimants paperwork failed to meet the requirements of the protection of freedoms act 2012

Surely I need to elaborate on theses points? and as for my mother not being the driver and only the keeper another user mentioned a letter that my mum has received (notice to keeper) so how can I use that as a valid defence for her? Then point 2 the claimants paperwork has failed to meet requirements of the protection of freedoms act 2012. How have they failed?

You say I shouldn't need help with the defence but I'm telling you I don't have a clue what I'm doing or meant to be writing hence why I am reaching out to you guys. As stated in the newbies post if the matter results in a court claim then a post should be written, this is what I have done in the hope someone can help me but I am no further forward with what I believe to be a strong written defence.

Coupon-mad

I appreciate what you are saying but seriously the defence for my mother is

1. the keeper is not the driver
2. The claimants paperwork failed to meet the requirements of the protection of freedoms act 2012

We do not disagree (if you are right that the NTK was non-POFA) but there are more branches to a defence than that.

If you have ''NO CLUE'' about what to write, that just tells us that you haven't read the defences we keep signposting you to read in the NEWBIES thread post #2.

Please, please go and read the defence examples over the weekend. Plenty of them have the non-POFA/non-driver argument, this is nothing new, but that is NOT the only defence.

the claimants paperwork has failed to meet requirements of the protection of freedoms act 2012. How have they failed?

You'll know how they have failed, when you compare the NTK to the POFA. I show a link to the VERY EASY to read Schedule 4, in the first post of the NEWBIES thread, so people can compare their NTK with the Act.

Have a look, and if unsure, show us the NTK, we can tell (both sides please, cover the VRN and name/address).

nosferatu1001

Indeed, yes it tells you to post a thread HOWEVER that doesnt mean you stop reading the newbies thread, which explains and has links to example defences.

So, have you read the examples there? A simple yes or no is needed.

Dwilkes2

As stated earlier my mother had disposed of the NTK & all other letters. (Silly I Know).

I will re-read the newbies thread as advised.
Is it possible I am reading the wrong one? can a link be put on here to direct me to the correct newbies post? just so I'm certain. As I feel really stupid at the fact I have read it more than once & all you guys are telling me everything I need to know is on that post

Thank you AGAIN

Coupon-mad

As stated earlier my mother had disposed of the NTK & all other letters. (Silly I Know).

And as advised already and reiterated twice, she sends the PPC a SAR right now to the address IamEmanresu gave you for PAS, to get all letters & all data, which they MUST produce so she will have it by WS/evidence stage.

Is it possible I am reading the wrong one? can a link be put on here to direct me to the correct newbies post?

Nope, see my signature. It tells all newbies where to click AT THE TOP, to go back.
YOU DO NOT NEED ANOTHER LINK - IT'S AT THE TOP OF EVERY PAGE.