No ticket/wrong address - PCN, debt collectors

Daniellep64013

Again, I'm sorry if this is a stupid question - but where do I find the POC?

My partner didn't purchase any tickets on any of the occasions, he said he didn't think he needed to as there was not a ticket machine. The sign does say you can also pay by phone, but he didn't. This is why I'm struggling with what the defence will actually be, with him not purchasing a ticket at all.

Thank you for your help.

Le_Kirk

The particulars of claim would have been sent with the Letter of Claim (or sometimes it is called Letter Before Claim). You have received a letter before claim haven't you and court papers and are expecting to defend this in court? If you did not received full particulars then that is one of your defence points as shown in Bargepole's defences.

KeithP

Daniellep64013 wrote: »

The sign does say you can also pay by phone, but he didn't. This is why I'm struggling with what the defence will actually be, with him not purchasing a ticket at all.

Just taking that one point in isolation as an example...

It very much looks to me that the signs were not clear enough to make the point that payment could be made by phone.

Was that because the signs were unreadable? - damaged? Too small print? Hidden is bushes?

It the signs were unclear/invisible, then there is no way that they can form the basis of a contract.

It therefore follows that if no contract was ever made, then the driver did not agree to the excessive charge.


Just to add:
The Particulars of Claim can often be found on the Claim Form - in a box labelled (somewhat surprisingly) Particulars of Claim.

Redx

apart from any POC being on your N1 claim form that you were sent by the CCBC, you may also find them in your LBC if one arrived before the claim form

plus if you have followed the NEWBIES sticky thread and sent a SAR by email to the DPO at your PPC, then the data supplied will also help with any POC so you can try to address the issues

yes its going to be difficult if the driver was bilking and not paying for the service, ie:- thinking they could get away with it, so maybe they should suffer and should pay

but up to now none of you have paid and do not want to pay, so to win this and not pay you have to win on a technicality, like BECKHAM did when his lawyer found a loophole


signage formed any contract with the driver, as do landowner agreements, so its these aspects that are important, poor signage , no landowner contract , plus any failures under laws like POFA2012 etc


sometimes its difficult to defend the indefensible

Daniellep64013

This is what I have, is there anything that needs adding/removing? I'd appreciate any help, thank you!...

IN THE COUNTY COURT

CLAIM No: xxxxxxxxxx

BETWEEN: XXXXXXX

CIVIL ENFORCEMENT LTD (Claimant)

-and-

xxxxxxxxxxxx (Defendant)

________________________________________
DEFENCE
________________________________________

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

4. Due to the sparseness of the particulars, it is unclear as to what legal basis the claim is brought. The particulars of claim state that the Defendant was in breach of the terms and conditions. It is denied that the Defendant, or any driver of the vehicle, entered into any contractual agreement with the Claimant, whether express, implied, or by conduct.

6. The terms on the Claimant's signage are displayed in a font which is too small to be read from a passing vehicle, and is in such a position that anyone attempting to read the tiny font would be unable to do so easily. It is, therefore, denied that the Claimant's signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract.

8. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4, at Section 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper, in this case £100. The claim includes an additional £93.73, for which no calculation or explanation is given as to the basis of the increase.

In summary, the Claimant’s particulars disclose no legal basis for the sum claimed, and the Court is invited to dismiss the claim in its entirety.

Statement of Truth:
I believe the facts contained in this Defence are true.

Name
Signature
Date

Daniellep64013

The sign says about paying via machine or over the phone. There was no machine at the car park - does this need to be included anywhere?

Coupon-mad

Yes you need a point about the background to the case, which would be that there is no PDT machine and the signage is not obvious, so the driver never knew this was a pay & display car park. As the letters went to an old address, the Defendant knew nothing about this for months and so the driver repeated the parking conduct, oblivious to the issue and believing the car park was free for customers of the adjacent shops.

And you need to add the usual point about no landowner authority, from other defence examples, forcing CEL to show their contract, which might help you later.

Daniellep64013

Is this what is needed re. landowner authority?...
The Claimant is put to strict proof that it has sufficient interest in the land or that there are specific terms in its contract to bring an action on its own behalf. As a third party agent, the Claimant may not pursue any charge, unless specifically authorised by the principal. The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant does not have the authority to issue charges on this land in their own name, and that they have no right to bring any action regarding this claim.

The terms and conditions on the sign are very small but the 'pay and display' part is clear, would I still put that on? Or just that there was no machine?

Will add on about the old address.

Thanks for your help!

Daniellep64013

Have changed the defence, does this present better and have what is needed?...

IN THE COUNTY COURT

CLAIM No: xxxxxxxxxx

BETWEEN:

CIVIL ENFORCEMENT LTD (Claimant)

-and-

XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXX (Defendant)

________________________________________
DEFENCE
________________________________________

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

2. Due to the sparseness of the particulars, it is unclear as to what legal basis the claim is brought. The particulars of claim state that the Defendant was in breach of the terms and conditions. It is denied that the Defendant, or any driver of the vehicle, entered into any contractual agreement with the Claimant, whether express, implied, or by conduct.

3. The terms on the Claimant's signage are displayed in a font which is too small to be read from a passing vehicle and is in such a position that anyone attempting to read the tiny font would be unable to do so easily. It is, therefore, denied that the Claimant's signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract.

4. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4, at Section 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper, in this case £100. The claim includes an additional £93.73, for which no calculation or explanation is given as to the basis of the increase.

5. All correspondence was sent to the Defendant’s previous address, therefore the Defendant was unaware of the parking conduct and continued to park at the Worksop Miners Welfare Inst, believing parking was free for customers of adjacent stores.

6. The car park at the Worksop Miners Welfare Inst had no pay and display machine for customers to use, therefore the Defendant was not able to use a pay and display method of parking. In relation to signage once again, the font is not of an adequate size to detail the methods of paying via telephone.

7. The Claimant is put to strict proof that it has sufficient interest in the land or that there are specific terms in its contract to bring an action on its own behalf. As a third party agent, the Claimant may not pursue any charge, unless specifically authorised by the principal. The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant does not have the authority to issue charges on this land in their own name, and that they have no right to bring any action regarding this claim.

8. In summary, the Claimant’s particulars disclose no legal basis for the sum claimed, and the Court is invited to dismiss the claim in its entirety.

Statement of Truth:
I believe the facts contained in this Defence are true.

Name
Signature
Date

Daniellep64013

Sorry for the 100 posts, just trying to get it right!