Britannia Rejected POPLA Appeal

mpg286

Coupon-mad wrote: »

OK now read all the other Britannia threads from the past ten days or so...you need to look at the company numbers on all the letters.

Search the forum for Britannia company number

Hi,

I have done some reading on the avem1 thread, and other threads like it. The early letters I received on this were from “Britannia Parking a registered trading name of Britannia parking Group Ltd and any of its wholly owned subsidiaries...Reg no. 08182990.”

This is the same as the claimant (Britannia parking Group Ltd T/A Britannia Parking) on the claim form.
I am assuming that their previous mistake of pursuing the claim under the name “Britannia Parking Ltd”, a defunt company, is not a viable defence for me?

Have to rely on the signage argument?

mpg286

Re-drafted defense:

IN THE COUNTY COURT

CLAIM No: xxxxxxxxxx

BETWEEN:

Britannia Parking Group Ltd. (Claimant)

-and-

xxxxxxxxxxxx (Defendant)

________________________________________
DEFENCE
________________________________________

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

2. The Particulars of Claim state that the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or the driver of the vehicle. 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. Further, the particulars of the claim do not meet the requirements of Practice Direction 16 7.5 as there is nothing which specifies how the terms were breached.

3. 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, or any driver of the vehicle, entered into any contractual agreement with the Claimant, whether express, implied, or by conduct.


4. 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 not be able to drive with due care and attention. There is no signage available when walking from some of the parking bays to the commercial units. It is, therefore, denied that the Claimant's signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract.

5. 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.

6. 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 £60, for which no calculation or explanation is given, and which appears to be an attempt at double recovery.

7. 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


I left out the parts on grace period, as I am well beyond it, and the naming issues (as it seems the claiment is correct on my claim form)

Coupon-mad

How did you get on with my suggestion in post #8 before the claim arrived?

You won't have much else to go on, unless you can blow apa rt their 'legitimate interest' in pursuing the charge, by getting emails from the retail park Managers stating that they want the charge rescinded and do not support it.

I'd try that now, you never know, maybe they are fed up with complaints and will cancel it for you and are about to kick B out.

Even if they cannot cancel it (they should be able to, even after POPLA, or reduce it to £30 to cover the POPLA fee and a bit for the letters) if they are fed up with complaints and support it being cancelled, an email saying that is their view as landowners, would be an ace up your sleeve.

This would be evidence to kill the 'commercial justification/legit interest' facade that somehow hoodwinked the surprisingly easily led 'up the garden path and round the corner' Supreme Court Judges in Beavis!

mpg286

Coupon-mad wrote: »

How did you get on with my suggestion in post #8 before the claim arrived?

I never recieved any responce.

I will send another email to the well known, national coffee house which uses the car park

Coupon-mad

I left out the parts on grace period, as I am well beyond it,

Agreed.

and the naming issues (as it seems the claimant is correct on my claim form)

But are any of the letters along the way, from or electronically signed 'Britannia Parking Ltd' in which case it could be argued the claimant failed to identify the creditor, as required under the POFA.

mpg286

I have just recieved my SAR, and looked through it all.

All of their letters have the footer:

Britannia Parking is a registered Trading Name of Britannia Parking Group
Limited and any of its wholly owned subsidiaries.
Registered office: Britannia Parking Group, County Gates House, 7th Floor,
300 Poole Road, Poole, BH12 1AZ
Registered in England No. 08182990

I'm guessing this absolves them when they call themselves "Britannia Parking" on their letters?

Coupon-mad

Yes, never mind.

So you will have to gather this evidence so keep pushing for email replies you can use:

You won't have much else to go on, unless you can blow apart their 'legitimate interest' in pursuing the charge, by getting emails from the retail park Managers stating that they want the charge rescinded and do not support it.

If they are fed up with complaints and support it being cancelled, an email saying that is their view as landowners, would be an ace up your sleeve.

This would be evidence to kill the 'commercial justification/legit interest' facade that somehow hoodwinked the surprisingly easily led 'up the garden path and round the corner' Supreme Court Judges in Beavis!

mpg286

Am I right in thinking that the next steps are to post my defence (as per the draft on this thread), and then prepare a Witness Statement (with all my photographs and specifics as to why I dont believe I am liable etc etc)?

Le_Kirk

Yes, file your defence in line with the method suggested by KeithP in post # 17. You can start on compiling your evidence for the Witness Statement stage and await you DQ.