Premier Park Claim Form - Defence stage

Coupon-mad

Wow...just checked cached versions of streetview (didn't know you could do that) and i can now pin point the month that the entrance sign 'disappeared'...way before the date of the PCN. Thats great evidence to add.

I am so pleased I suggested that. This could be a silver bullet at evidence stage.

I would definitely defend as driver and you can say that this Defendant had not used this car park before, so by suggesting that ''the car has been there before so the appellant must have known'' means this Claimant misled POPLA on two counts.

Premier Park are you reading this thread too? You lot must be so proud.

jtm1

Coupon-mad wrote: »

I am so pleased I suggested that. This could be a silver bullet at evidence stage.

I would definitely defend as driver and you can say that this Defendant had not used this car park before, so by suggesting that ''the car has been there before so the appellant must have known'' means this Claimant misled POPLA on two counts.

Premier Park are you reading this thread too? You lot must be so proud.

Agreed, thanks again for the savvy suggestion.

Following your advice, i've decided to defend as the driver. I wished i had've clocked onto that deception at the POPLA stage..oh well.

See draft defence below. Cheers guys

jtm1

DRAFT - ALL COMMENTS WELCOMED

I was conscious not to go crazy with the length, as per the advice in the NEWBIES post, as i know all the detail should come in the WS later.

However, should i be quoting the specific BPA COP sections that PP breached at this stage, in terms of signage? Or can i just expand on points 5-7 (see below) with those details later?



In The County Court
Claim No: XXXXXXX
Between
PREMIER PARK Ltd (Claimant)

-and-

XXXXXXXX (Defendant)

____________
DEFENCE
____________


1. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.

2. The vehicle, registration XXXX, of which the Defendant is the registered keeper and driver, was parked on the material date in a marked bay at XXXX Car Park.

3. The Particulars of Claim state that the Defendant “was the registered keeper and/or the driver of the vehicle(s”. These assertions indicate that the Claimant has failed to identify a Cause of Action, and is simply offering a menu of choices. As such, the Claim fails to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4, or with Civil Practice Direction 16, paras. 7.3 to 7.5.

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.

Would 3. apply when defending as the driver? and would 4. apply because the particulars do state that the nature of the incident/terms of contract/performance of contract...i'll happily post what PP said in the particulars but i imagine you guys have heard it all before.

5. It can be evidenced that there were no entrance signs on the day, the months leading up to, and the months after the date of the alleged contravention. To this end, no signs were seen therefore no such contract was entered.

6. Further and in the alternative, it is denied that the claimant's signage sets out the terms in a sufficiently clear manner which would be capable of binding any reasonable person reading them.

7. The terms on the Claimant's signage are also 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 Claimant is put to strict proof that it has sufficient proprietary interest in the land, or that it has the necessary authorisation from the landowner to issue parking charge notices, and to pursue payment by means of litigation.

9. 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 £70, for which no calculation or explanation is given, and which appears to be an attempt at double recovery.

10. 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 the facts contained in this Defence are true.

Name
Signature
Date

Coupon-mad

Would 3. apply when defending as the driver? and would 4. apply because the particulars do state that the nature of the incident/terms of contract/performance of contract...i'll happily post what PP said in the particulars but i imagine you guys have heard it all before.

Both apply.

Here you need to explain the alleged contravention as part of the facts, as when reading that defence I have no idea why you got a PCN:

2. The vehicle, registration XXXX, of which the Defendant is the registered keeper and driver, was parked on the material date in a marked bay at XXXX Car Park.

And?

jtm1

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Both apply.

Here you need to explain the alleged contravention as part of the facts, as when reading that defence I have no idea why you got a PCN:
And?

Thanks, what you said made sense.

2. The vehicle, registration XXXXXXX of which the Defendant is the registered keeper and driver, was parked on the material date and time in a marked bay at XXXXXX

3. It is believed that it will be a matter of common ground that the claim related to a purported debt as a result of the issue of a Parching Charge Notice (PCN), which states "Failure to Pay for the Duration of Stay" in relation to an alleged breach of the terms and conditions by the driver of the vehicle XXXX when it was parked at XXXXX Car Park, on XXXXXX 2017.


Does this cover it? I rang the court this morning to double check the deadline was the 10th December at it turns out it's today at 16:00!

Anyone else in a similar position to me, RING THE COURT to double check as it appears the deadline is not always Date of Service + 5 days + 28. I'll be submitting this at 15:00 if i've had no comments by that time.

Thanks again.

jtm1

KeithP wrote: »

With a Claim Issue Date of 5th November, and having done the AoS in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 10th December 2018 to file your Defence.

Hi Keith. Just to inform you my defence deadline was actually today at 16:00 (e.g. 28 days from the date of service stamped on the claim form. I assume this may be a difference between the Northampton and Salford centres? Just thought it would be good to clarify for others who may look at this thread.

KeithP

jtm1 wrote: »

I rang the court this morning to double check the deadline was the 10th December at it turns out it's today at 16:00!

jtm1 wrote: »

Anyone else in a similar position to me, RING THE COURT to double check as it appears the deadline is not always Date of Service + 5 days + 28.

jtm1 wrote: »

Hi Keith. Just to inform you my defence deadline was actually today at 16:00 (e.g. 28 days from the date of service stamped on the claim form. I assume this may be a difference between the Northampton and Salford centres? Just thought it would be good to clarify for others who may look at this thread.

In post #2 I asked:

KeithP wrote: »

What is the Issue Date on your County Court Money Claims Centre Claim Form?

You responded:

jtm1 wrote: »

Issues date of 05.11.18 and from County Court Money Claims Centre Claim. I forgot to mention AOS was submitted on 08.11.18! Date of Service is 08.11.18.

I noted the Issue Date as 5 November 2018, and allowed five days for service, then added twenty-eight days.
That brings us to Saturday 8th December 2018.

Where the calculated date falls on a non-working day, then one is allowed until 4pm on the next working day to file a Defence - bringing us to the date I gave you in post #7:

KeithP wrote: »

With a Claim Issue Date of 5th November, and having done the AoS in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 10th December 2018 to file your Defence.

I cannot see where I went wrong.

I do now note that you mention a Date of Service just three days following the Issue Date but I have no idea how the court arrived at that.
I was under the impression that the Date of Service was always five days after the Issue Date.


Anyway, sorry to have mislead you, but I'm pleased to see that you filed your Defence on time.


As you say, this must be a quirk of the Salford MCC.

jtm1

KeithP wrote: »

I cannot see where I went wrong.

I do now note that you mention a Date of Service just three days following the Issue Date but I have no idea how the court arrived at that.
I was under the impression that the Date of Service was always five days after the Issue Date.


Anyway, sorry to have mislead you, but I'm pleased to see that you filed your Defence on time.


As you say, this must be a quirk of the Salford MCC.

No need to apologise you're only trying to help!

I still can't get my head around it, the chap on the phone initially said 20th December, until i questioned him in which he replied "oh i'm really sorry i've calculated that completely wrong" so they clearly don't have the deadline 'on screen' and calculate it in the same way you and i would...not sure if he knew what he was on about.

Anyway, thought i best play it safe and submit.

I shall await the Directions Questionnaire and follow the advice from IamEmanresu.

I'll keep you guys posted!

jtm1

Quick update - Directions Questionnaire received yesterday, 2 weeks after defence submission.

I called the court after 1 week and they advised that it was sent out that morning so it took a week to get here.

Nevertheless, i completed it following IamEmanresu's advice and will send a copy to the court and PP in the morning.