WY Parking Limited Claim & Defence Response

bendyspoon

Umkomaas wrote: »

Paras 5 and 11 missing.

Schoolboy error , thanks and amended.

Coupon-mad

Nice research, I only wrote this today and suggested attaching the new Judgment from CEC16's thread (when they add it!) even though we normally say no attachments go with a defence, bargepole feels this is different because it can strike a case out, early doors, and I agree:

4. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4, at paragraph 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. The claim includes an additional £60, for which no calculation or explanation is given, and which appears to be an attempt at double recovery and is an abuse of process.

4.1. This is further supported by many county court Judges striking out cases in recent months without a hearing, due solely to adding 'damages' that the claimant cannot ever justify. This is known to have occurred at Caernarfon, Southampton, Isle of Wight and Warwick courts in recent weeks, all of which are in the public domain and proved with a copy of the Judge's Order summarily striking out the claims, which are tainted by the £60 falsely added by the cartel-style modus operandi of more than one robo claim solicitor. As an example, a copy of a recent Order by District Judge Grand is attached to this defence. (I'm awaiting the Order to be posted on here. If anyone has a link if I've missed it already that would be much appreciated.)

4.2. An application to try to protect the cartel-like position of some of the 'bigger player' parking firms, was placed before the area Circuit Judge in that case (which is on all fours with this one) and a hearing was held on 11th November 2019. The Defendants successfully argued on points including a citation of the CRA 2015 and the duty of the court to apply the 'test of fairness' to a consumer notice (a statutory duty that falls upon the courts, whether a consumer raises the issue or not). All three points below were robustly upheld by District Judge Grand, sitting at the Southampton Court, who agreed that:

(a) The Claimant knew or should have known, that £160 charge (howsoever argued or constructed, and even if it had been on the signs) was in breach of POFA, due to paras 4(5) and 4(6).

(b) The Claimant knew or should have known, that £160 charge (howsoever argued or constructed, and even if it had been on the signs) was unconscionable, due to the Beavis case paras 98, 193, 198 and 287.

(c) The Claimant knew or should have known, that £160 charge where the additional 'recovery' sum was in small print, hidden, or in the cases before him, not there at all, is void for uncertainty and in breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Schedule 2 (the 'grey list' of terms that may be unfair) paragraphs 6, 10 and 14.

I haven't even seen CEC16's Judgment from DJ Grand yet myself!

No-one has a link to it until they post it on their thread but they will do this week as I've been in email contact yesterday. But yes, it will be good if all defendants start adding it to their DEFENCES, as a new tactic to inform the Judiciary & make them stop & think about the CRA.

1505grandad

para 2 - " Such a notice was not served within 14 days of the parking event and when the notice was served, did not fully comply with statutory wording."

BUT:-

post #21 in this thread says - "There was only the PCN on the vehicle which from what I can see didn't include anything about a Notice to Driver. On the rear it says "if the driver fails to pay this charge within 28 days, the creditor or their agent may request additional details from the DVLA of the keeper of the vehicle issued with a PCN."

I believe that the "PCN on the vehicle" is the NtD to which I was referring - so unless I have misunderstood the situation para 2 refers to ANPR.

A NtD has between 28 and 56 days for issue of a Notice to Keeper.

Coupon-mad

Good spot!

A windscreen PCN gives a different deadline for NTK (as per the POFA para 8).

bendyspoon

1505grandad wrote: »

para 2 - " Such a notice was not served within 14 days of the parking event and when the notice was served, did not fully comply with statutory wording."

BUT:-

post #21 in this thread says - "There was only the PCN on the vehicle which from what I can see didn't include anything about a Notice to Driver. On the rear it says "if the driver fails to pay this charge within 28 days, the creditor or their agent may request additional details from the DVLA of the keeper of the vehicle issued with a PCN."

I believe that the "PCN on the vehicle" is the NtD to which I was referring - so unless I have misunderstood the situation para 2 refers to ANPR.

A NtD has between 28 and 56 days for issue of a Notice to Keeper.

Thanks for that. I will remove this paragraph as I know they issued a NTK but I can't confirm what the date was it was received, it may well have been longer than 56 days but until my SAR comes back I can't know for sure..

bendyspoon

Hopefully this gets thrown out before court but I am not going to be in the country during the months of January, February & returning early March (travelling/backpacking).


Now if this does end up at a hearing and it is within them timescales, do I have the right to request an alternative date?

Umkomaas

You can list the dates of your non-availability at the Directions Questionnaire stage (about 4-6 weeks after submitting your Defence) which will be sent to you by the CCBC after the Claimant has confirmed, after reading your Defence, that they are proceeding.

I recognise you will likely be out of the country before the DQ arrives, but you can download one from the internet, but I'm uncertain as to how soon in the process you can submit it.

Others might know, see if anyone else comments. You could also call the CCBC and ask their advice.

nosferatu1001

Echo calling the CCBC. mention you are out when you expect the DQ to be sent so can you complete one now. There should be no issue with this at all.

bendyspoon

Thanks to you both for the quick reply. I will give them a call and explain the situation.

bendyspoon

A quick update on my case for any of you who are interested and have helped me throughout,

I was due in court in March this year which for obvious reasons got delayed and I was awaiting the revised date to come through in the post. 

Today I received a letter from my local court......which to my surprise was not a revised date at all, but a letter stating that the case has been struck out as an abuse of process.

For those who are reading who think they can't donit or don't have the knowledge, I have very little knowledge of law, I'm an architectural technologist by trade and I've never stepped foot in a court room but still managed to win my case with the assistance of this forum.

So thanks to each an everyone of you who helped me with this, if I can return the favour or if posting my form of judgement order assists anyone then just let me know, thanks again.