County Court - Britannia Parking

Parking_Appeal19

Hi All,

There is an update in my case!

I submitted my defence. The case was transferred to the local court, reviewed by the Judge and struck out on the grounds that it disclosed no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim. The judge gave Britannia 2 weeks to submit a revised Particulars of Claim.

Britannia have now submitted a revised particulars of claim, which is akin to a statement. They have also included an annex with photographs and communication. Of note some of the photographs appear to be different (i.e. signage now shows £100 parking charge as opposed to the £85 parking charge as per the original photographs they sent pre Court proceedings).

I now have 2 weeks to submit a revised defence. As the particulars of claim is now detailed, I will remove that from my defence. However, I have now added that the evidence presented to Court is different to the evidence presented to the Defendant pre Court proceedings, I will also annex the photographs.

Additionally I made a complaint to the ICO as Britannia did not respond to a SAR request effectively. ICO have clearly contacted Britannia as I recently received a response to my non compliance complaint to Britannia, several months later!! In that they have lied as have stated that when they were made aware that two PCN's had been issued for the same alleged contravention they immediately withdrew the erroneous PCN. This is untrue. When the PCN's were received the RK appealed, notifying Britannia that they had issued TWO PCN's for the same alleged contravention. They ignored this and proceed to POPLA. The RK wrote a defence at POPLA, again pointing out that they were being pursued for two PCN's for the same alleged incident. At this point Britannia withdrew one as a 'gesture of goodwill'!! This is far from them withdrawing the PCN as soon as they were made aware of the error. Can I write in the defence that Britannia have been untruthful in their communications with the Defendant, therefore brings into doubt the truthfulness of their claim and statement?

Thanks

Parking_Appeal19

One further point, in the SAR response Britannia also stated:

We have reviewed this case and implemented an improvement to our ANPR technology whereby all duplicate VRM reads are clearly flagged for review, subsequently minimizing future errors.

This appears to be an admission that there were possible faults with their ANPR technology, again raising doubt about the validity of their claim. Should I mention this or is it a bit weak?

Le_Kirk

If the judge told you to submit a REVISED defence, you should do just that, striking out (I believe in RED) the text about particulars of claim not being provided and adding anything you want to add on BLUE. Did the judge ask you to submit a revised WS as well because that is the place for the evidence that has been changed by the claimant.

Parking_Appeal19

The judge has not instructed me to submit a revised defence, just provided the option to submit a revised defence if the claimant submitted a revised particulars of claim, which they have. I will be submitted a revised defence given some of the points which have come up since the last defence, as per my earlier posts.



There is no mention of a WS at this stage, just a defence to the particulars of claim.

Le_Kirk

OK, just do it in the manner described so you don't lose any of the good points in your original defence.