LBC BW Legal/Britannia Parking

KeithP

With a Claim Issue Date of 31st January, and having done the Acknowledgement of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Tuesday 5th March 2019 to file your Defence.

That's nearly four weeks away. Loads of time to produce a perfect 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.

AnotherVoice

Thank you,
Is the defence listed here, https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5949034/britannia-bwl-court-claim-driver-question 7th Feb a reasonable basis to start with and customise to my own circumstances?

Is it worth going down the 'premature claim' route in your opinion?

AnotherVoice

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 Defendant asserts this claim is premature and in breach of the GDPR by unreasonably and unfairly processing data for a claim, before the Claimant has supplied the SAR data and information requested in good faith by the Defendant.

3. The facts of the matter are that the Defendant has no memory of visiting the car park in question on the date in 2016, nor does the defendant admit they failed to make a valid payment. The defendant has visited the car park in question multiple times, in order to go the one of the two restaurants on the site.
The car park layout is such that the bays directly behind the restaurant contain no signage from the claimant and appear to be for the sole use of restaurant patrons.

4. Accordingly, it is denied that the Defendant breached any of the Claimant's purported contractual terms, whether express, implied, or by conduct.

5. 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.

6. The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant has not incurred £60 costs to pursue an alleged £165 debt, the defendant denies any interest is owing to the claimant. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, in Schedule 4, Para 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper No NTK was ever received by the Defendant, meaning the Defendant had no way of appealing to the land owner to have the PCN cancelled.

7. 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 that the facts stated in this Defence are true.

Coupon-mad

Why are you admitting to being the driver in the defence?

Especially if it was way back in 2016 when you have 'no memory' of going there on the material date and in 2016, we know as a fact that Britannia DID NOT use POFA wording.

So, they cannot hold you liable and would need to prove who was driving.

So why admit to driving for a 2016 incident you can't recall & they can't prove?

You are throwing away the protection of the POFA, which means a keeper can't be pursued where the driver has not been identified. Take a look at any POFA driver not evidenced defence.

AnotherVoice

It was based on someone elses template. Also, my understanding of POFA was that if they cannot identify the driver they can pursue the keeper anyway?

nosferatu1001

Anothervoice - ONLY IF they met th estrict conditions of POFA. If the PPC doesnt meet the requirements, they lose that extra ability.
in 2016 they DID NOT
As you have been told.

AnotherVoice

forgive me asking a possibly obvious question.

did they fail to meet pofa, because you know from experience their PPC notices did not meet the requirements, or, because from what i have told you they did not meet requirements?

If it is from your prior knowledge is there a document or link you could point me to that i could read, or... do i get sent back to the newbies thread?

KeithP

AnotherVoice wrote: »

forgive me asking a possibly obvious question.

did they fail to meet pofa, because you know from experience their PPC notices did not meet the requirements, or, because from what i have told you they did not meet requirements?

If it is from your prior knowledge is there a document or link you could point me to that i could read, or... do i get sent back to the newbies thread?

You get sent to read Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act.


Now here's a bonus for you...

There is a link to Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act in the first post in the NEWBIES thread.

AnotherVoice

I was reading it the other day and, as it happens still have the tab open.. not quite got it memorised yet ;o)

nosferatu1001

We know that Britannia didnt manage it in 2016
Recently they have done.
If you dont yet have a copy of the NtK, thats what SARs are for - but it doenst matter; yo uallege they didnt comply with POFA in the defence, and make them prove otherwise. In the WS you can state the facts to show whats missing, as by that point you absolutley WILL have the NtK - as a result of the SAR.