UKPCM Gladstones PCN

Le_Kirk

Is 4th January the ISSUE date? If so, KeithP will be along to let you know your deadlines. If not, advise the issue date from the claim form.

Smeg_Head

Hi Le_Kirk, I thought it was but I've just checked, the issue date is the 7th

KeithP

Smeg_Head wrote: »

Good morning all
Last night we came home to find a claim form in our mailbox. We've been away and its dated 4th Jan so we're behind, by my reckoning we have to respond by Wednesday at the latest!

Smeg_Head wrote: »

Hi Le_Kirk, I thought it was but I've just checked, the issue date is the 7th

With a Claim Issue Date of 7th January, you have until Monday 27th January to file an Acknowledgment of Service, but there is nothing to be gained by delaying it. To file an AoS, follow the guidance offered in a Dropbox file linked from post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread. About ten minutes work - no thinking required.

Having filed an AoS, you have until 4pm on Monday 10th February 2020 to file your Defence.

That's three weeks away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence, but please don't leave it to the last minute.


When you are happy with the content, your Defence could 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. No need to do anything on MCOL, but do check it after a few days to see if the Claim is marked "defence received". If not, chase the CCBC until it is.

Having filed your Defence, there is more to do...

1. Do not be surprised to receive an early copy of the Claimant's Directions Questionnaire. Nothing of interest there. Just file it.
   
2. Wait for your own Directions Questionnaire from the CCBC, or download one from the internet, and then complete it as described by bargepole in his 'what happens when' post.
3. The completed DQ should be returned by email to the CCBC to the same address and in the same way as your Defence was filed earlier.
4. Send a copy of your completed DQ to the Claimant - to their address on your Claim Form.

Smeg_Head wrote: »

It's addressed to the keeper but they still haven't ascertained who was driving, and I haven't received anything regarding the SAR.

Post #2 above explained that they do not necessarily need to ascertain who was driving.

You sent the SAR over three months ago. Have you not chased them for a reply? What was their response? The ICO needs to be informed about their breach of the Data Protection Act 2018.

You must keep on top of this.

Smeg_Head

Thank you Keith, much appreciated

Smeg_Head

Step 8 of the MCOL: "Defendants full name (if different from that on the claim form)." How do I fill this in if the driver is unknown to Gladstones? Aren't I doing their work for them by telling them who was driving, or is it still the wife as she is the keeper and the person the claim is against?

Smeg_Head

Can someone read this before posting? There are some photos' which haven't come through but I think the outline should be enough

In The County Court

Claim No: XXXXXX

Between

UK Car Park Management Limited (Claimant)

-and-

XXXXXXXX (Defendant)

____________
DEFENCE
____________

1) The Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of vehicle registration number XXXXXXXX on the material date. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.

2) The facts of the matter are the signage on this site is inadequate to form a contract.

The signage informing motorists of the terms and conditions at the car park does not meet the requirements of both the “BPA Code of Practice” and “The International Parking Community Code of Practice” of which the claimant maintains they are members of.

“Where a Car Park has a defined entrance, Operators should display entrance signs ….”

“Entrance Signs should:

a) make it clear that the Motorist is entering onto private land;

b) refer the Motorist to the signs within the Car Park which display the full terms and conditions.

Signs should, where practicable, be placed at the entrance to a Car Park. Otherwise the signage within the Car Park must be such as to be obvious to the Motorist”

The driver did not observe any signage on entering the car park and was not aware it was private land.

Upon revisiting the site there are no signs on the left side of the entrance, and where there is a small sign on the right side, it is obscured by traffic leaving the car park (please note some of these pictures are from Google as they are clearer than my own):

The first sign viewable in the car park is obscured by a tree and on the other side if the car par park bays (this view was taken from the driver’s point of view, and in Winter when the tree was bare of leaves):

The only other sign possibly in view is on the right-hand side, but it faces 90 degrees from the direction of travel and is therefore easily missed. From the position where the car was parked or during walking from the car to the supermarket the sign was not obvious, in fact not even viewable:

For this reason, no contract had been entered into as the signage was not obvious to the driver.

3) The claimant specified the vehicle was “Parking On Access Road / Roadway” (which isn’t actually mentioned whatsoever on the sign at the car park), but the space is surrounded by bollards so there is no access behind. The space the driver did park in also does look like a valid car parking space.

From Google but with the bin in an obviously different position that day:

4) The markings on this car park are not sufficient to determine actual spaces, so how can parking bays be identified?

This photo was taken in similar sunny conditions as the day in question and you can see its very hard to see the lines:

Under artificial light after sunset is the easiest time to see the markings and even then, they aren’t clear:

There are no markings at all on some areas of the car park. The photo below demonstrates the confusion. In this example there is a yellow hatched box obviously stipulating where not to park, but that implies the rest of that area is fine to park in, but there are no marked bays.

5) The Claimant is put to proof that it has sufficient interest in the land or that there are specific terms in its contract to bring an action on its own behalf. As a third party agent, the Claimant may not pursue any charge, unless specifically authorised by the principal. The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant does not have the authority to issue charges on this land in their own name, and that they have no right to bring any action regarding this claim.

6) 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.

7) In summary, the Claimant's particulars disclose no legal basis for the sum claimed, and the Court is invited to dismiss the claim in its entirety.

Statement of Truth:

I believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true.

Name

Signature

Date

1505grandad

Just checking  -  you state:-
"UK Car Park Management Limited (Claimant)"

yet title and throughout the thread quoted "UKPCM" - (Parking Control Management)

Le_Kirk

You don't submit photos (or any evidence) with a defence, that comes later at witness statement time.  Can you edit your post and remove all that white space.  Also read the Abuse of Process thread by beamerguy and check threads by CEC16 and basher52 for more useful info around the £60 spurious addition.

Castle

The defence should have been filed by Monday 10th February, (see KeithP's post on 19th January), so you may already have a default judgement!

Smeg_Head

1505grandad said:

Just checking  -  you state:-
"UK Car Park Management Limited (Claimant)"

yet title and throughout the thread quoted "UKPCM" - (Parking Control Management)

I did, but the typo was in the original title, it is UK Car Park Management