Carer Permit not displayed

sav100

Please can people advise as to the best line of defence for a court hearing.

My wife omitted to display her carer's permit, when parked in a residential car park.

The reasons for this were that her elderly and house bound grandmother had called, requesting her immediate assistance. We have previously attended after similar calls and found her having fallen and subsequently being hospitalised.

My wife was clearly worried as to how her grandmother was and upon arriving at the address, rushed into the building, rather than ensuring she had displayed her permit.

Upon returning to her vehicle, a PCN was attached to the windscreen and my wife realised her genuine and honest error.

T&C's are that parking is permitted for vehicles clearly displaying a valid permit in front windscreen and/or pre authorised vehicle parked in allocated parking space. Retrospective evidence of authority will not be accepted.

One Parking Solutions are the culprits. My wife appealed to them initially, fully expecting for the matter to be closed based on the circumstances. They declined.

POPLA also rejected the appeal, as they found the PCN was issued in line with the T&C's, whilst commenting that they were unfortunately bound by their guidelines, even if they sympathised with the circumstances.

The landowner has been contacted, who advised he is unable to revoke the PCN.

Several letters have been received from Gladstones, with a Claim Form having now been received.

Other than again outlining the circumstances of the incident and highlighting it being a genuine error, with my wife having clear evidence that she possesses a permit and is allowed to park there, what is the best defence to use?

I can't find any like for like cases on the forum, other than permits relating to actual residents and relying on the property deeds.

We wish to fight this all the way and your help is very much appreciated.

KeithP

What is the Issue Date on the County Court Claim Form?

Redx

sav100 wrote: »

1) Other than again outlining the circumstances of the incident and highlighting it being a genuine error, with my wife having clear evidence that she possesses a permit and is allowed to park there,

2) what is the best defence to use?

1) which is the witness statement and exhibits stage

de minimis probably applies, plus possibly the EA2010 ?

2) start with the bargepole concise defence , add no landowner authority , de minimis , abuse of process , inadequate signage , EA 2010 etc

then address the POC

post the draft below for critique and await other comments

post the claim form issue date below

Coupon-mad

Brighton area? If so, pm me later on, once you have read some threads.

I am trustworthy and I help people in court in Sussex.

sav100

Thank you all so far.

The issue date is 6th December 2019.

Also, the particulars of the claims state "...Despite demands being made, the Defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability".

Is this a potential area to challenge, or is this standard wording?

The_Deep

Retrospective evidence of authority will not be accepted.

This might not go down very well in front of a judge. Why not challenge them to take you to court as n[FONT=Times New Roman, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]ine times out of ten these tickets are scams, so consider complaining to your MP as it can cause the scammer extra costs and work, and has been known to get the charge cancelled.

Parliament is well aware of the MO of these private parking companies, many of whom are former clampers, and on 15th March 2019 a Bill was enacted to curb the excesses of these shysters. Codes of Practice are being drawn up, an independent appeals service will be set up, and access to the DVLA's date base more rigorously policed, persistent offenders denied access to the DVLA database and unable to operate.

Hopefully life will become impossible for the worst of these scammers, but until this is done you should still complain to your MP, citing the new legislation.

[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/enacted[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]

Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these Private Parking Companies.[/FONT][/FONT]

Coupon-mad

sav100 wrote: »

Thank you all so far.

The issue date is 6th December 2019.

Also, the particulars of the claims state "...Despite demands being made, the Defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability".

Is this a potential area to challenge, or is this standard wording?

Completely standard, in fact you can(and should) read plenty of other threads ahead of you in the game of court, and see that Gladstones witness statements later on are so standard that posters have reported them to the SRA, who ARE investigating Gs.

If you are in Sussex my offer is genuine and you can pm me as I've added you to my allowed list.

KeithP

sav100 wrote: »

The issue date is 6th December 2019.

With a Claim Issue Date of 6th December, you have until Monday 30th December 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 Wednesday 8th January 2020 to file your Defence.

That's nearly four 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.
   
6. Do not be surprised to receive an early copy of the Claimant's Directions Questionnaire, they are trying to keep you under pressure. Just file it.
   
7. Wait for your DQ from the CCBC, or download one from the internet, and then re-read post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread to find out exactly what to do with it.

sav100

This is my first draft. Any feedback and pointers are much appreciated.

I have spent a considerable amount of time reading through the forum and picking out the relevant areas for my defence.

What are peoples thoughts on point 4? Should I be highlighting what the breach is, even though it is not stated in the POC? I want it to be clear that this is the biggest part of my reasons to fight the charge in the first place.


IN THE COUNTY COURT

CLAIM No: xxxxxxxxxx

BETWEEN:

ONE PARKING SOLUTION LTD (Claimant)

-and-

xxxxxxxxxxxx (Defendant)

________________________________________
DEFENCE
________________________________________


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

2. The Particulars of Claim (PoC) do not specify what the terms breached by the driver of the vehicle are. As such, the Claim fails to meet the requirements of Practice Direction 16 7.5 as there is nothing specifying what the terms were and how they were breached.

3. The claim appears to be based upon damages for breach of contract. However, it is denied any contract existed. Accordingly, it is denied that the Defendant breached any contractual terms, whether expressed, implied, or by conduct.

4. No legitimate interest in enforcing a charge – One of the key points from ParkingEye v Beavis 2015 was that the charge was necessary to deter overstaying; if they did not issue penalties then the car park would be unfairly used. I have a valid carer’s permit and therefore, the claimant has no legitimate interest and the charge is therefore an unenforceable penalty

5. 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. The Claimants claim of £243, is therefore a clear attempt at double recovery.

6. Abuse of Process - Judges have disallowed all added parking firm 'costs' in County courts up and down the Country. In Claim number F0DP201T on 10th June 2019, District Judge Taylor sitting at the County Court at Southampton, echoed an earlier General Judgment or Order of DJ Grand, who on 21st February 2019 sitting at the Newport (IOW) County Court, had struck out a parking firm claim. One was a BPA member serial Claimant (Britannia, using BW Legal's robo-claim model) and one an IPC member serial Claimant (UKCPM, using Gladstones' robo-claim model) yet the Order was identical in striking out both claims without a hearing:
''IT IS ORDERED THAT the claim is struck out as an abuse of process. The claim contains a substantial charge additional to the parking charge which it is alleged the Defendant contracted to pay. This additional charge is not recoverable under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4 nor with reference to the judgment in ParkingEye v Beavis. It is an abuse of process from the Claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to recover. This order has been made by the court of its own initiative without a hearing pursuant to CPR Rule 3.3(4) of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998...''

7. In summary, it is the Defendant's position that the claim discloses no cause of action, is without merit, and has no real prospect of success. Accordingly, the Court is invited to strike out the claim of its own initiative, using its case management powers pursuant to CPR 3.4.

KeithP

Don't forget to file an Acknowledgment of Service.
You still have plenty of time to do it, but don't overlook it.

The_Deep

Have you complained to your MP yet, this is the sort of case they love.