Is Claim Form valid? FURTHER UPDATE CLAIM HAS BEEN STRUCK OUT - ALL OVER?

Romeo5793

Thanks All

What is POFA please remind me? Is that whether they followed procedure and didn't try to chase the driver? If so, they didn't.

I didn't do a counter claim. I don't really want to make any great statement, just not have to pay what they are asking because the driver wasn't parked there for longer than the stated time limit, I can't prove that they weren't and neither can they.

Hopefully this will get appended to the original thread soon so it will all be in one place.

Redx

POFA is a law that came into force in october 2012, easily googled and is referred to in the NEWBIES thread

it has strict rules on what the alaimant must say and do in order to use its powers

typically this is timescales and wordings, plus if vehicles are private or leased/hired , plus if there was a windscreen ticket or not

various sections cover various scenarios, should you need to become acquainted with it, even if its belatedly after 6.5 years , its easily found

doesnt make much difference to what a driver did or did not do, they are taking you to court as keeper , you can state you were not driving, in which case it hinges on POFA compliance or not, plus landowner authority , CoP adherence and signage

you are letting the driver details and story cloud your mind to why its your name (or the company name) on the claim form. if they can hold you as keeper liable , they dont care what the driver did or didnt do, and you did not name the driver under POFA, to get from under it , hence why they think you should pay as keeper

I am not convinced that you understand these basic principles yet

Coupon-mad

I suggest we pick up on your other thread with any last questions, and let this die.

Romeo5793

Hi All

So I am now submitting the Directions Questionnaire and have a couple of questions around RK vs driver and POFA going forward. Should I now state who the driver was? Should I call them as a witness? In my witness statement should I just be concentrating on POFA transgressions and not even bothering with the whole double dip fact of the incident?

TIA for any advice

Coupon-mad

Should I now state who the driver was?

No, you do not make submissions in the DQ. And you do not ever have to name the driver.

Should I call them as a witness?

Yes if it is about a double dip 'two visit' case, especially if they are prepared to attend the court with you for the hearing.

In my witness statement should I just be concentrating on POFA transgressions and not even bothering with the whole double dip fact of the incident?

Absolutely categorically, NO.

soolin

Sorry for any confusion, I have merged two threads and closed another.

Romeo5793

Thankyou for merging the threads, will keep everything on this one now.

I don't understand how I can simultaneously bring the driver as a witness (i.e put "2" on the DQ from) but never name them? (they are happy to come along and be a witness).

I also don't quite understand the comments about POFA now - on the day shold I go through the whole double dip thing as relayed to me by the driver and also focus on all the POFA transgressions eg not naming a legal representative etc - I guess the more points the better?

Fruitcake

Double dip is your strongest defence point, so you should concentrate on that.
If the driver has proof they parked the car elsewhere in between the two visits then that proof should be given. It will not hurt the keeper's case if the driver is identified and will probably help the case greatly if they appear as a witness to state they left and returned.
If they have something in writing from the company they were working for then that will help as well.

If on the other hand you are relying on the NTK being non-PoFA compliant then you should not identify the driver. The danger with that is that the judge may not be familiar with the PoFA and simply believe the fine upstanding parking company when they show the first entry and last exit photos as being from a highly reliable piece of technology.

Other opinions are available.

Don't forget to point out that the UK Government has prohibited the use of ANPR scameras for monitoring council and local authority car parks because it is unreliable, prone to errors including the notorious double dipping events, and was withdrawn as being not fit for purpose.
Because the private parking scamdustry is unregulated, they are able to use any technology they like even though they know it is flawed because these flaws generate income for them.

Romeo5793

I know I am getting ahead of myself btw - for now I just need to decide whether to put 1 witness attending on the DQ (myself, RK) or 2 (myself, RK and driver, as yet unamed)

Seems maybe I shold just keep it simple and put myself only the RK that they are taking this action against? Would the driver still be allowed to attend and speak to me only?

Romeo5793

sorry fruitcake, cross post, not ignoring your advice.

I think I like your option 1:

"Double dip is your strongest defence point, so you should concentrate on that.
If the driver has proof they parked the car elsewhere in between the two visits then that proof should be given. It will not hurt the keeper's case if the driver is identified and will probably help the case greatly if they appear as a witness to state they left and returned.
If they have something in writing from the company they were working for then that will help as well."

As the driver does have an email from the company they were working at stating they were due to be there on the day. Also their google location data shows them driving back and forth from the workplace to the retail carpark in question.