Particulars of Claim - Gladstones / UKCPM

wilenany

From reading around, apparently 'Particulars of Claim' like these are sparse and can work in the defendant's favour. How is that?

The driver of the vehicle registration (the 'Vehicle') incurred the parking charge(s) on DATE for breaching the terms of parking on the land at ADDRESS.
The defendant was driving the Vehicle and/or is the Keeper of the Vehicle
AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS
£160 for Parking Charges / Damages and indemnity costs if applicable, together with interest of AMOUNT pursuant to s69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at 8% pa, continuing to Judgement at AMOUNT per day.

DATE, ADDRESS and AMOUNT were completed but e.g. the vehicle registration hasn't been specified.

Coupon-mad

Because it doesn't state what 'breaching the terms of parking' meant, or whether they are holding the Defendant liable as the driver, or as the keeper under the POFA.

You will get more help when you show us your draft defence, like everyone else with a claim does, and tell us the issue date of your claim?

wilenany

Thank you and I apologise for not replying sooner.

Their claim form was dated 08 Nov 2018.

Acknowledged and defence submitted on time.

Have now been moved to local court for 20 May 2019.

Claimant has until end of 23 April 2019 to pay the court trial fee.

"Each party must deliver to the other party and to the court office copies of all documents on which that party intends to rely at the hearing no later than fourteen days before the hearing."

I've noted I should be aiming to have sent the Witness Statement by Fri 03 May 2019 to allow for that.

The location is an allocated parking bay for a rental property. The parking space belongs to the flat. I deal with a landlord who owns it. They deal with the building management company who has this block of flats and some others nearby.

The building management company appoints and deals with a parking management company.

Problems with my landlord at the time meant I wasn't able to use them or the management company to help.

When I first moved in it was a different parking management company. Then UKCPM took over. They didn't remove all of their old signs and they didn't issue the permit until after the charge notice.

After the NTK, several emails to/from UKCPM and they refuse to properly accept a complaint or deal with it.

They've since lost the contract but their signs are still up.

DEFENCE

1. The Particulars of Claim are sparse. The Defendant is prejudiced and is unable to prepare a full and complete Defence. The Defendant reserves the right to seek from the Court permission to serve an Amended Defence should the Claimant add to or expand their Particulars at a later stage of these proceedings and/or to limit the Claimant only to the unevidenced allegations in the Particulars.

2. The Particulars of Claim fail to refer to the material terms of any contract and neither comply with the CPR 16 in respect of statements of case, nor the relevant practice direction in respect of claims formed by contract or conduct. The Defendant further notes the Claimant's failure to engage in pre-action correspondence in accordance with the pre-action protocol and with the express aim of avoiding contested litigation.

3. The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant has not incurred £60 costs to pursue an alleged £100 debt. 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, in this case £100.

4. The Defendant denies any debt to the Claimant.

5. The Defendant denies that their vehicle was parked at [ADDRESS ONE] and puts the Claimant to full proof of the vehicle being at that specific location.

6. The Defendant acknowledges that they are the registered keeper of vehicle, registration number [specified in original ] and declares that the vehicle was parked in an authorised and exclusively allocated bay on the land at [ADDRESS TWO] on the evening of [DATE ONE]. It is a minimum of 250 metres/yards by public road from one location to the other.

7. The Claimant's primary purpose is to ensure residents can use their own parking bays.

8. The Claimant's behaviour has been contrary to that by trying to deny the Defendant the right to use the parking space specifically allocated to them through the Defendant's tenancy agreement.

9. The Claimant failed to provide any permit until after the [DATE ONE].

10. The Claimant failed to provide reasonable means of contacting them in relation to enquiring or obtaining any permit that might have been necessary.

a. The Claimant did not provide on their signage either a website or email address.

b. The Claimant did not provide on their signage, letters or website a telephone number charged at no more than the basic rate as required by the Consumer Rights Directive (see The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013).

c. The Claimant displayed a telephone number on their signage, letters and website an 0845 number without the cost of calling as required since 1st July 2015. In any case, this would have cost the Defendant a minimum of 50 pence per minute plus unknown charges to contact the Claimant.

d. The Claimant's manner did not provide reassurance that calling the 0845 number would have seen a reimbursement as specified in The Consumer Contracts Regulations.

e. The Claimant only during mid-2018 firstly changed their website to specify calling costs and then eventually moved to a compliant telephone number. Both of these actions seemed to only happen after the Defendant informed the Claimant.

f. The Claimant still continues to display their original and non-compliant signs at the location of [ADDRESS TWO].

11. The Claimant has allowed the land at [ADDRESS TWO] to have parking signage from two different schemes to be displayed before, on, and after [DATE ONE].
a. Which one is in effect and how are residents to know?
b. Despite being informed and reminded on five occasions between [DATES], the Claimant has neither corrected their signage or removed anything. Both schemes are still displayed as of today [DATE - and today].

12. The Claimant has acted obstructively without showing any willingness to rectify the situation with any efficiency. This can be demonstrated in their email replies that carry evidence they could see there is a problem or complaint that they can personally resolve but their single solution would be to require the Defendant to pay to post a letter that they would then 'reject' with a requirement to pay a fee to pass this to a third party.

13. The Claimant was reminded of all of this on [DATE] and informed that their legal representatives had sent correspondence headed "letter before claim" but did not include all of the information specified by the Pre-Action Protocol and that there were inaccuracies with the amounts and location.

Coupon-mad

OK so that was the defence?

Now you need to show us your draft WS & evidence (see tips in the NEWBIES thread). Can you now get the landlord to email you or sign a WS to say HE owns that space outright, and that you were authorised to par there and he has never agreed to UKCPM penalising people on his land - or will he not even send you an email?

Include all this in your WS, which is the simple story of what happened:

When I first moved in it was a different parking management company. Then UKCPM took over. They didn't remove all of their old signs and they didn't issue the permit until after the charge notice.

After the NTK, several emails to/from UKCPM and they refuse to properly accept a complaint or deal with it.

They've since lost the contract but their signs are still up.

Then consider what evidence to show - this must include your tenancy agreement and pics that prove there were other old signs up/and that UKCPM have now been kicked out (any proof from the MA that they were removed due to complaints? You could email to ask...try to fish for some damning evidence!).