We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
UKPPO Court Claim Form
Comments
-
I have requested a SAR to the ticket provider and they have sent me back several copies of the photos of the car in a space from different angles. Also included are copies of the email chain when an "appeal" was sent via email, asking for further details of the PCN when a NTK was received. There's also copies of the window ticket and NTK.
They didnt send any additional details requested such as:
- all evidence you intend to use against me (to include- a copy of the contract with the landowner under which you assert authority to bring a claim against me, a copy of the alleged contract with the driver, a plan showing where the signs were displayed, details of the signs displayed)
- a close up of the signage at PLACE on DATE.
- evidence you have paid a debt collector.0 -
Those items are not your data , so they don't have to provide them until the WS plus Exhibits stage further down the line
If you have the ntk etc , you should be aware of what it's all about , even if the POC aren't clear0 -
They have provided all my information then.
The information I was trying to get from the ticket issuer was why they believe I owe them any money, breach of contract, trespass etc. As from reading other post this determines which case law i should present as evidence.
The NTK states that:
"This charge relates to the period of parking that immediately preceded the issue of that Notice, the charge having been incurred for the reason as follows: Unauthorised Parking. Liability for the same having been brought to the attention of the driver by clear signage in and around the Site at the time of parking."
The claim form only states:
"monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant in respect of a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) issued on XXXXX (Issue Date) at at Private Parking At [Address]. The PCN relates to [Vehicle] under registration [Reg]. The terms of the PCN allowed the Defendant 28 days from the Issue Date to pay the PCN, but the Defendant failed to do so."0 -
So they are stating that it was unauthorised parking , meaning no permission to park , probably meaning that a permit is required
Unauthorised parking = trespassing , due to forbidding signage
Not authorised to park means no parking contract offered to the driver
No parking contract means no consideration
UKPPO cannot take people to court for trespassing0 -
Thanks for the info that's really helpful.
From that then I'll try and find some more wording to put in the defence around them not having any right to bring the claim against me and that it should be the landowner?0 -
Why do you feel the need to tell them who should be bringing the claim against you?0
-
It's seems logical to me that if you're saying that someone isn't the correct person to bringing a claim, then to say who should be reinforces the point.
I infer that I shouldn't do this and therefore my defence is OK as is?0 -
You meant Third Person!Thanks! updated to be all in first person0 -
:doh: My head's chocca0
-
Defence looks OK except remove all this padding & waffle!3. The Claimant’s solicitors are known to be a serial issuer of generic claims similar to this one, with no due diligence, no scrutiny of details nor even checking for a true cause of action. HMCS have identified over 1000 similar poorly produced claims and the solicitor's conduct in many of these cases is believed to be currently the subject of an active investigation by the SRA.
4. The Defendant believes the term for such conduct is ‘robo-claims’ which is against the public interest, demonstrates a disregard for the dignity of the court and is unfair on unrepresented consumers. The Defendant has reason to believe that this is a claim that will proceed without any facts or evidence supplied until the last possible minute, to my significant detriment as an unrepresented Defendant.
5. The Defendant suggests that parking companies using the small claims track as a form of aggressive, automated debt collection is not something the courts should be seen to support.PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
CLICK at the top or bottom of any page where it says:
Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards

