Overstayed in car park. Help please.

Angelfisk11

Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 11 Nov 2018
Member No.: 100,886



Hi all,

Beginning of October I received a letter from Parking Eye advising me to pay £85 withing 28 days or there would be court action against me. This was the first communication I received.

I emailed them explaining that I hadn't received first communication and asking for proof, as I know normally they send a picture of your car entering/exiting the car park. I explained if they did this I would be happy to pay the reduced fine which is normally offered at first.

I heard nothing back and then a few weeks ago I received a letter advising court proceedings. Please can you help? I have no idea what to do and I'm worried about having a ccj against me that will effect my credit.

I have acknowledged the claim left the defence block empty and started my defence which I intend to send by post. Please can you give me an idea if I'm on the right lines and offer some tips please.

FYI: the car park is shared by home bargains and a gym. I was attending the gym for ohysio appointments for several weeks due to a car accident which has impeded my general mobility. I would often visit home bargains and do some shopping after which I would often be very slow doing duue to my ongoing back issue. . I had not noticed any signs in all of my visits.

Thanks

fisherjim

Have you read the newbies thread yet?
What did the Gym say when you took it up with them?
What did HB say when you complained to them?
Why are you happy to pay a reduced scam [STRIKE]fine[/STRIKE] invoice, which is no more than a bribe to get you to pay up and shut up?

Angelfisk11

Well I'm not really it was just a point that I have received no proof from them.

I have read most of the newbies thread yes.

Still awaiting reponses from home bargains and the gym.

Redx

the timeline doesnt make sense, nor the story either

I suspect the infringement was oct 2017 , not last october !!

if you have a claim form from Northampton CCBC, and if you have done the AOS by logging in using the MCOL reference, then you now need to post the DATE OF ISSUE and the POC DETAILS and the charges breakdown below, in your next reply

then you need to draft your defence and post it below, for critique

because if you have a live court claim, you cannot hang around waiting for the gym and home bargains to reply


and send PE an SAR to their DPO to get all their evidence, docs , pictures , contract and signage etc, ASAP, as they have 30 days to reply to your SAR

Angelfisk11

The infringement was August of this year apparently, but the first communication I received was beginning of October as an LBC. I'm presuming the others got lost in the post or this is a scam.

The date of issue is 9th of November.

The POC is " claim for monies outstanding from the defendant, as registered keeper, in relation to a Parking Charge, issued 16/08/2018, for parking in private land in breach of the terms and conditions (the contract). ParkingEyes automated number plate recognition system, monitoring Home Bargains Wrexham captured vehichle

---

entering and leaving the car park, overstaying the max stay time. The signage, clearly displayed at the entrance to and throughout the car park states that this is private land, is managed by ParkingEye LTD. And is a Max stay site, along with other T+C's by which those who park on the site agree to be bound. In accordance with the T+C's set out in the signage, the parking charge became payable. Notice under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 has been made given under sch4, making the keeper liable. This claim is in reference to Parking Charges."

I have already sent a SAR.

Thanks for the advice!

I will start working on a defence.

KeithP

Angelfisk11 wrote: »

The date of issue is 9th of November.

With a Claim Issue Date of 9th November, and having done the Acknowledgement of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Wednesday 12th December 2018 to file your Defence.

That's over two weeks away. Loads of time to produce an good Defence, but don't leave it to the very last minute.


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

Print your Defence.
1. Sign it and date it.
   
2. Scan the signed document back in and save it as a pdf.
   
3. Send that pdf as an email attachment to CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk
   
4. 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'.
   
5. Log into MCOL after a few days to see if the Claim is marked "defended". If not chase the CCBC until it is.
   
6. Do not be surprised to receive a copy of the Claimant's Directions Questionnaire, they are just trying to put you under pressure.
   
7. Wait for your DQ from the CCBC, or download one from the internet, and then re-read post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread to find out exactly what to do with it.

Angelfisk11

Anyone know what law it is that requires them to provide you with your details that they hold on you please?

Angelfisk11

IN THE COUNTY COURT

CLAIM No.:

BETWEEN:

PARKING EYE LTD (Claimant)

-and-

(Defendant)

DEFENCE STATEMENT


1. I am the Defendant, and it is admitted that I was the driver of the vehicle on the day of this event.

2. Save as specifically admitted in this defence the Defendant denies each and every allegation set out in the Particulars of Claim, or implied in Pre-action correspondence.

Preliminary matters:

3. The claimant failed to include a copy of their written contract nor any detail or reason for - nor clear particulars pertaining to - this claim (Practice Directions 16 7.3(1) and 7C 1.4(3A) refer).

4. The Claimant’s solicitors are known to be a serial issuer of generic claims similar to this one, with no diligence, no scrutiny of details nor even checking for a true cause of action. I believe the term for such conduct is ‘roboclaims’ which is against the public interest, unfair on unrepresented consumers and parking companies using the small claims track as a form of aggressive, automated debt collection is not something the courts should be seen to support. On the basis of the above, I request the court strike out the claim.

In further support of there being a want of cause of action:



5. Any ‘charge’ or terms on signage on the day was not seen but even if the court believes signs were displayed, the terms were in such small print as to be illegible, contrary to the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

6. It is submitted that the defendant has asked for evidence from the claimant on several occasions (16th October and 26th November) and is yet to receive them. This is in violation of the General Data Protection Regulations 2018 (GDPR) which requires the claimant to provide information on the defendant within one calendar month. This time limit has now elapsed. If the claimant required more time to consider this request the defendant should have been notified within one calendar month.

7. It is submitted that the first correspondence received by the defendant was a letter before court at the beginning of October with no evidence of the VRN or the timings of the over stay.

8. It is submitted that the claimant needs to make reasonable adjustments to the time limit, as per the Equality Act 2010, as the defendant suffers from chronic back pain worsened by a traffic collision in May of this year. This is a form of disability and the defendant is in the process of applying for funding to support living a normal life in spite of the pain.

9. It is submitted that (apart from properly incurred court fees) any added solicitors fees are simply numbers made up out of thin air, and are an attempt at double recovery by the Claimant, which would not be recoverable in any event.

10. It is submitted that the Claimant is merely an agent acting ‘on behalf of’ the landowner who would be the only proper claimant. Strict proof is required of a chain of contracts leading from the landowner to this Claimant, to allow them the right to form contracts and to sue in their name.)


11. It is submitted that the conduct of the Claimant in pursuing this claim is wholly unreasonable and vexatious. As such, I am keeping a note of my wasted time/costs in dealing with this matter.

12. The court is invited to strike out the claim, due to no cause of action nor prospects of success.

13. The facts and information in this defence are true and the Defendant is not liable for the sum claimed, nor any sum at all.

PLEASE CAN YOU LOOK OVER THIS AND LET ME KNOW WHAT YOU THINK PLEASE