Counterclaim advice needed, please. Claim Form Received from Northampton CCBC. Bizarre PCN case!

waamo

JungTheForeman wrote: »

My thoughts exactly. A conspiracy theorist might suggest that there's some sort of kick-back going on somewhere!

A suspicious person might send a FOI request to ask how much the parking company pays the hospital each year.

KeithP

My own Claim Form was issued on 26 Feb 2019.

With a Claim Issue Date of 26th February, you have until Monday 18th March to do the Acknowledgement of Service, but there is nothing to be gained by delaying it. To do the AoS, follow the guidance offered in a Dropbox link from post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread. About ten minutes work - no thinking required.

Having done the AoS, you have until 4pm on Monday 1st April 2019 to file your Defence.

That's a 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.

Fight_the_good_fight

In addition to acknowledging the AOS on MCOL I would be sending a SAR to Britannia ASAP requesting all personal details and documents they hold on you in relation to this alleged parking infringement.


This may then provide further information which to base your defence (though may not arrive in time) and subsequent statement.

nosferatu1001

1) Do the AoS On MCOL TODAY. Do NOT wait. That gives you the 33 days mentioned
2) Issuing a counter JUST to ensure you get a hearing is an abuse of process, and if the judge decides youve annoyed them enough, can deicde YOUR behaviour was unreasonable and award costs against YOU.
3) Did you give them your details? You must have done, if no ntk wa sissued. They dont have to issue one IF they know who the driver is, for obvious reasons. and if YOU gave them your details, there is no DPA breahc either.

nosferatu1001

4) I cant see where youve told us what they actually alledged was the reason for the charge. What was it? How would you prove otherwise? What do they have - presumably photos of the vehicle?

JungTheForeman

nosferatu1001 wrote: »

4) I cant see where youve told us what they actually alledged was the reason for the charge. What was it? How would you prove otherwise? What do they have - presumably photos of the vehicle?

Many thanks again for all of your comments and advice... much appreciated.

Re. above: The contravention was a simple 'failure to display a valid ticket/permit/voucher'. But this is complete nonsense; my valid parking permit was clearly displayed in the windscreen as always. Many other colleagues received the same - they all displayed valid permits, too. For some reason, Britannia suddenly decided to dish out PCNs like confetti on this day. I can't explain why; only that it seems to be a risk-free scam.

And as far as I can see, this is a really easy scam. Some people just pay up rather than go through an appeal process, some panic and pay at the 'debt collector' stage, and some get completely lost during this County Court Business Centre claim stage, consequently ending up with a CCJ against them.

From what you've told me, counterclaiming is a complete waste of time. These parking companies dish out a load of PCNs like confetti, to anyone and everyone, and they make a load of money by doing so. Why not? What's to stop them? Who cares if people are parked legitimately - they seem to know that many will still pay up. No recourse, no counterclaims, judges appear to be on their side... they continue to get away with it.

Clare237

It’s a really poor system. Really unjust. My MP couldn’t have been less bothered when I emailed him about my situation...

I hope your situation gets resolved.

JungTheForeman

Many thanks to all of the experts here for all of your invaluable advice so far. An update:

1. PCN received 20 July 2017. Completely ignored since, but have kept all correspondence.
2. Claim Form from CCBC issued 26 February 2019.
3. AoS submitted 05 March 2019. Therefore, I have until 01 April 2019 to prepare and submit my defence.

First things first: This is a new experience for me, so I was expecting to find a letter specifically entitled 'NOTICE TO KEEPER' in my bundle of papers. But I think the NTK must be the one I've now located. Unfortunately, I'm unable to upload a scanned image here, but it's titled 'PARKING CHARGE NOTICE', and is essentially a more detailed version of the PCN: asking for details of the driver (if it wasn't me); offering a discounted £50 if paid within 14 days; details of the contravention; where and when; photographic evidence; etc.

Date of this Notice: 27 November 2017
Date of Contravention: 20 July 2017

Therefore, a gap of 112 days.

Excellent advice so far has mentioned:

A Notice to Keeper can be served by ordinary post and the Protection of Freedoms Act requires that the Notice, to be valid, must be delivered either

(Where a notice to driver (parking ticket) has been served) Not earlier than 28 days after, nor more than 56 days after, the service of that notice to driver; or...

Therefore, given that the gap was 112 days, does this immediately invalidate the Claim? In other words: Is this, in itself, enough to make a defence?

BTW, the next correspondence following this was a FINAL REMINDER on 28 November 2017, and then the first in a series of debt recovery letters, dated 16 December 2017.

In anticipation, thanks again for all of your help.

waamo

It's part of a defence. It means they are outside the timescale to invoke POFA therefore can't hold the keeper liable, only the driver.

I hope you haven't told them who the driver was.

JungTheForeman

Thanks Waamo. No, I've had no communication with them whatsoever, and certainly not revealed who the driver was.

Given that, how should I be wording this into my defence? Bear in mind that any other aspect of my defence would, indeed, reveal who the driver was.