Claim Form Originating from bwlegal and Britannia parking

avem1

Wording changed in first post....thanks for pointing that out chaps!

Hi Coupon Mad. I do not have anything that says NTK. I honestly cant remember if there were drop down boxes and what might have been ticked etc.
In the appeal it was written".....relating to the PCN I've just received".

Are you guys saying this defence should rest among other things on the identity of the driver? So not a time to say who it is and then rely on the poor signage as the defence?

Please bear with me, this is a lot of new and confusing stuff to a newbie...not much sleep in the last week either due a poorly baby with croup and on top of that my partners got flu too.

Redx

it probably wont say NTK or Notice To Keeper

however, for a windscreen ticket, the PPC has to send the NTK (Notice To Kepper) between day 29 and day 56 with the correct POFA2012 woring on it to the keeper in order to hold a keeper liable

this aspect should have been part of the POPLA appeal , especially if it never arrived, so look for any poistal notice that came after day 29

it may well be that they never sent one, in which case a KEEPER defence may be more apt. they cannot hold a keeper liable unless they follow the law

poor signage will definitely be a part of any DEFENCE , because they rely on the signage in order to try to form a contract with the driver

as for any comments made, dont argue with us, just accpet what we say and learn from them, this is new to you but not new to the people trying to help you. we know its new to you, so slow down and absorb it slowly, take a chill pill

the defendant could have been an occupant of the vehicle, but not necessarily the driver, so the royal we covers this aspect

so it could be a keeper defence which also includes a WS by the keeper

avem1

On a Final reminder from Britannia its written:

"We wrote to you advising that the above PCN has been issued to the above vehicle and that it remained unpaid. As a result we have contacted DVLA who informed us that you were the registered keeper or you have been identified as the driver at the time the Parking Charge was issued. In this notice you were informed that the Driver is liable for the parking charge"

And in the evidence pack submitted to POPLA by Britannia they have written:
"We received an appeal on 'date' from the driver of the vehicle"

KeithP

And in your opening post you told us:

avem1 wrote: »

Also, during my appeal process Britannia had this in one of their letters "We have identified appellant to be the driver and liable for the parking charge notice. The driver has supplied us with the home address in the appeal letter and we therefore find them liable for the parking charge notice"

Can you check exactly what you wrote in your initial appeal?

Also, it is well known that some of these online appeal portals revert you "I was the driver" from the dropdown menu if not checked immediately before submitting..

avem1

Just seen on the Britannia appeal near the top of the form it says:

'Note: Driver was the selected choice'

Coupon-mad

OK, at least you know, so defend as driver, like some half the Defendants here do. You know what to do as we've already pointed you to defence templates:

Both example defences by the legally qualified poster 'bargepole' that I've linked in the NEWBIES thread as 'concise' examples, are all about unclear signs. I'd use one of bargepole's defences as your base, then add in stuff about the POFA and 'no keeper liability' if they sent no NTK due to being distracted by an appeal.

Also do an ADVANCED search for keywords: BW Legal Britannia defence and read some like yours, as well as bargepole's concise templates, and adapt what you find.

avem1

Thanks to everyone for all the help you have given me, not only in your spare time but also for free! I am extremely grateful.

I'll be submitting my defence on here in due course.

As I missed the opportunity to respond to BWL's Letter of Claim (ie never read the letter in time), should i send my defence to them too or just to the court now?

Also should I ask BWL to provide me with a site plan of the car park with:
1 The location, size and orientation of each sign
2. What each sign says
3. The size of the Writing on each sign.

Britannia did provide a poor quality google satellite photo of the car park during their POPLA submission which only showed numbered circles for the sign locations.
These numbers were not referenced to anything and nor did they show which direction the signs were facing or detail any of the 1-3 points I mention above.


I notice as well that on the first letter I received from BWL, it states "As you have failed to make a payment or raise an appeal within 28 days from the date of the PCN......"

But I did raise 2 appeals, 1 with Britannia and 1 with POPLA within those 28 days.

Coupon-mad

should i send my defence to them too or just to the court now?

To the court only. You need to read bargepole's 'what happens when' post (NEWBIES thread).

Also should I ask BWL to provide me with a site plan of the car park with:
1 The location, size and orientation of each sign
2. What each sign says
3. The size of the Writing on each sign.

NO.

Like all the other cases you care to read, send a SAR to the PARKING FIRM for all data held, all photos/letters.

avem1

Hi Guys. Posted below is my first draft defence. I look forward to all constructive criticism and recommendations etc!
I made a SAR to the parking company in which I also requested an unredacted copy of the contract with the landowner.
They have sent a copy that has the landowners names/signatures redacted. This is dated in early 2018 whereas the previous copy which was presented during my popla appeal is a different one (still redacted) dated early 2016. Does this make any difference that they've sent 2 different contracts (ie possibly signed by different people/companies) and are they still allowed to redact the details?

Many thanks

In The County Court
Claim No: XXXXXXX
Between
XXXXX (Claimant)

-and-

XXXXXXX (Defendant)

____________
DEFENCE
____________

1. The Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of vehicle registration number XXXXXXX on the material date. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.

2. The facts of the matter are that there were no visible signs stating the claimants terms from entering the car park area to where the defendant parked.
On the foot route the defendant made from their parked car to XXXX (shop) and back, there were no signs.
This is in contravention of The British Parking Association (BPA) Approved Operator Scheme (AoS) section 18.3 under which the claimant is an active member.

3. The claimant has one sign positioned to the left of a pavement on a private access road prior to entering the main car park areas. It is denied that the claimant's sign sets out the terms in a sufficiently clear or visible manner which would be capable of binding any reasonable person reading them. It would also be unsafe to attempt to read this sign whilst negotiating two concurrent roundabouts in a busy traffic and pedestrian area. This sign is positioned so that any passing pedestrians would completely obscure it from view. It is, therefore, denied that the Claimant's sign is capable of creating a legally binding contract.
This sign is in contravention of the BPA AoS Appendix B.

4. Due to the sparseness of the particulars, it is unclear as to what legal basis the claim is brought, whether for breach of contract, contractual liability, or trespass. However, it is denied that the Defendant entered into any contractual agreement with the Claimant, whether express, implied, or by conduct.

5. The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant has not incurred £60 costs to pursue an alleged £70 debt.

6. In summary, it is the Defendant's position that the claim discloses no cause of action, is without merit, and has no real prospect of success. Accordingly, the Court is invited to strike out the claim of its own initiative, using its case management powers pursuant to CPR 3.4.

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

Name
Signature
Date

avem1

Any of the pros around to comment on my draft defence?