We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Defence assistance
Lop5
Posts: 28 Forumite
Hi all,
Could you please have a look through the subsequent defence for a parking fine received from vehicle control services.
Unfortunately had myself a fluttering ticket in a pay and display car park, came back to the car to it being flipped upside down on the dash. I fell for the 'this is not a parking charge' nonsense and contacted them straight away to appeal, thinking if I just sent a picture of my ticket they'd cancel the fine. Naive I know. Low and behold they refused to cancel the fine. Stupidly gave them all of my details and admitted to being the driver with their handy little drop-down option during the appeal. Ignored all correspondence after that until the LBC. Received my county court claim form with an issue date of 31/12/18. Completed the AOS within a few days, just need to now submit a defence.
POC include:
The Claimant's claim is for the sum of £160 being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant in respect of a Charge Notice (CN) for a contravention on XXXXX at XXXXXXXX
The CN relates to a XXXXXXXX under registration XXXXXXXX. The terms of the CN allowed the Defendant 28 days from the Issue Date to pay the CN, but the Defendant failed to do so. Despite demand having been made the Defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability.
The claimant seeks the recovery of the CN and interest under section 69 of the County Court Acts 1984 at the rate of 8% at the same rate up to the date of Judgement or earlier payment.
Any help with my defence would be very much appreciated.
IN THE COUNTY COURT
CLAIM No: XXXXXXX
BETWEEN:
Vehicle Control Services Limited (Claimant)
-and-
XXXXXXX (Defendant)
________________________________________
DEFENCE
________________________________________
1. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.
2. The Defendant denies the occurrence of a contravention on the material date and furthermore disputes the fact an outstanding liability is owed to the Claimant.
3. The facts are the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of vehicle registration number XXXXXXX on the material date and was parked in a marked bay for which a valid pay and display ticket was purchased and valid during the time the alleged contravention occurred.
3.1 Photographic evidence of the valid pay and display ticket was provided to the Claimant in which the Claimant determined was not sufficient evidence to rescind the unjustified ‘Charge Notice’.
4. Due to the sparseness of the Particulars of Claim, in which the Claimant only mentions a ‘Charge Notice’ with no further description, the Particulars of Claim thus fail to fulfil CPR Part 16.4 1(a), as a concise statement of the facts on which the claimant relies has not been supplied, restricting the Defendant’s ability to prepare a specific defence.
5. The Particulars of Claim do not state whether the Claimant believes 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.
6. It is unclear as to what legal basis the claim is brought, whether for breach of contract, contractual liability, or trespass. Therefore the Particulars of Claim do not meet the requirements of Practice Direction 16 7.5 as there is nothing which specifies how the terms were breached. However, it is denied that the Defendant entered into any contractual agreement with the Claimant, whether express, implied, or by conduct.
7. It is denied that a 'Charge Notice' ('CN') was issued on the material date given in the Particulars. This Claimant is known to routinely affix misleading pieces of paper to vehicles impersonating authority, bearing the legend ‘THIS IS NOT A PARKING CHARGE NOTICE’. It is reasonable to conclude, from the date of the Notice to Driver ('NTD') which was mailed to the Defendant, that the imitation document the Claimant asserts was a 'CN' was no such thing, and therefore the driver was not served with a document that created any liability for any charge whatsoever on the material date. The Claimant is put to strict proof.
7.1 The time stamp recorded on the imitation ‘CN’ states 15:13pm whereas the time stamp documented on the ‘NTD’ is recorded at 15:14pm. Ambiguity between documentation detailing timing of the alleged contravention demonstrates an unreliability in regards to the Claimant’s alleged ‘CN’. The claimant is put to strict proof as to what time the alleged contravention occurred.
8. 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.
8.1 Furthermore, the terms on the Claimant's signage are displayed in a font which is too small to be read from a passing vehicle or from the parking bay in which the vehicle was parked, 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.
9. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, 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/Driver, 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.
10. 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.
11. 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.
STATEMENT OF TRUTH
I believe the facts contained in this defence are true.
Could you please have a look through the subsequent defence for a parking fine received from vehicle control services.
Unfortunately had myself a fluttering ticket in a pay and display car park, came back to the car to it being flipped upside down on the dash. I fell for the 'this is not a parking charge' nonsense and contacted them straight away to appeal, thinking if I just sent a picture of my ticket they'd cancel the fine. Naive I know. Low and behold they refused to cancel the fine. Stupidly gave them all of my details and admitted to being the driver with their handy little drop-down option during the appeal. Ignored all correspondence after that until the LBC. Received my county court claim form with an issue date of 31/12/18. Completed the AOS within a few days, just need to now submit a defence.
POC include:
The Claimant's claim is for the sum of £160 being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant in respect of a Charge Notice (CN) for a contravention on XXXXX at XXXXXXXX
The CN relates to a XXXXXXXX under registration XXXXXXXX. The terms of the CN allowed the Defendant 28 days from the Issue Date to pay the CN, but the Defendant failed to do so. Despite demand having been made the Defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability.
The claimant seeks the recovery of the CN and interest under section 69 of the County Court Acts 1984 at the rate of 8% at the same rate up to the date of Judgement or earlier payment.
Any help with my defence would be very much appreciated.
IN THE COUNTY COURT
CLAIM No: XXXXXXX
BETWEEN:
Vehicle Control Services Limited (Claimant)
-and-
XXXXXXX (Defendant)
________________________________________
DEFENCE
________________________________________
1. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.
2. The Defendant denies the occurrence of a contravention on the material date and furthermore disputes the fact an outstanding liability is owed to the Claimant.
3. The facts are the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of vehicle registration number XXXXXXX on the material date and was parked in a marked bay for which a valid pay and display ticket was purchased and valid during the time the alleged contravention occurred.
3.1 Photographic evidence of the valid pay and display ticket was provided to the Claimant in which the Claimant determined was not sufficient evidence to rescind the unjustified ‘Charge Notice’.
4. Due to the sparseness of the Particulars of Claim, in which the Claimant only mentions a ‘Charge Notice’ with no further description, the Particulars of Claim thus fail to fulfil CPR Part 16.4 1(a), as a concise statement of the facts on which the claimant relies has not been supplied, restricting the Defendant’s ability to prepare a specific defence.
5. The Particulars of Claim do not state whether the Claimant believes 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.
6. It is unclear as to what legal basis the claim is brought, whether for breach of contract, contractual liability, or trespass. Therefore the Particulars of Claim do not meet the requirements of Practice Direction 16 7.5 as there is nothing which specifies how the terms were breached. However, it is denied that the Defendant entered into any contractual agreement with the Claimant, whether express, implied, or by conduct.
7. It is denied that a 'Charge Notice' ('CN') was issued on the material date given in the Particulars. This Claimant is known to routinely affix misleading pieces of paper to vehicles impersonating authority, bearing the legend ‘THIS IS NOT A PARKING CHARGE NOTICE’. It is reasonable to conclude, from the date of the Notice to Driver ('NTD') which was mailed to the Defendant, that the imitation document the Claimant asserts was a 'CN' was no such thing, and therefore the driver was not served with a document that created any liability for any charge whatsoever on the material date. The Claimant is put to strict proof.
7.1 The time stamp recorded on the imitation ‘CN’ states 15:13pm whereas the time stamp documented on the ‘NTD’ is recorded at 15:14pm. Ambiguity between documentation detailing timing of the alleged contravention demonstrates an unreliability in regards to the Claimant’s alleged ‘CN’. The claimant is put to strict proof as to what time the alleged contravention occurred.
8. 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.
8.1 Furthermore, the terms on the Claimant's signage are displayed in a font which is too small to be read from a passing vehicle or from the parking bay in which the vehicle was parked, 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.
9. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, 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/Driver, 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.
10. 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.
11. 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.
STATEMENT OF TRUTH
I believe the facts contained in this defence are true.
0
Comments
-
With a Claim Issue Date of 31st December, and having done the Acknowledgement of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 4th February 2019 to file your Defence.Received my county court claim form with an issue date of 31/12/18. Completed the AOS within a few days...
That's very close, 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.
- Sign it and date it.
- Scan the signed document back in and save it as a pdf.
- Send that pdf as an email attachment to CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk
- 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'.
- Log into MCOL after a few days to see if the Claim is marked "defended". If not chase the CCBC until it is.
- Do not be surprised to receive a copy of the Claimant's Directions Questionnaire, they are just trying to put you under pressure.
- 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.
0 - Sign it and date it.
-
Looks fine, except I would not refer to a Charge Notice that you later deny existed.
So maybe change it to:3.1 Photographic evidence of the valid pay and display ticket was provided to the Claimant, who rejected the appeal out of hand with a template response, having harvested all of the Defendant's data by enticing victims to 'appeal' even though there was no PCN. The Defendant avers this is sharp practice and typical of this rogue industry. [STRIKE]in which the Claimant determined was not sufficient evidence to rescind the unjustified ‘Charge Notice’.[/STRIKE]PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
CLICK at the top or bottom of any page where it says:
Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD0 -
Thank you very much for the advice, I’ll get that altered ASAP. Do you think there’s anything else I can add in?0
-
No. Looks like it covers the bases for now. Submit it as per KeithP's post.PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
CLICK at the top or bottom of any page where it says:
Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD0 -
Hi all,
I'm now at the stage where I have to submit my witness statement to the courts and then a court date will be set. I'm in the midst of writing my witness statement, however I have received the claimant's witness statement in which they respond to all of my defence points. I'm not sure what is now going to be my best defence. Am I able to post the claimant's witness statement on here to get your advice on how I should respond?0 -
Dropbox.
Redact all identifying personal details - name, case number, addresses, registrations before it goes into the public domain.0 -
Complain to your MP. On 18th March 2019 a Bill was enacted to curb the excesses of these private parking companies. Codes of Practice are being drawn up, an independent appeals service will be set up, and access to the DVLA's date base more rigorously policed, and persistent offenders denied access. Hopefully life will become impossible for the worst of these scammers.
Until this is done you should still complain to your MP, citing the new legislation.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/enacted
Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these Private Parking Companies.You never know how far you can go until you go too far.0 -
As I'm a new user I am unable to post the dropbox link. Is there a way around this?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.4K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.8K Spending & Discounts
- 244.4K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards