IAS appeal multiple tickets

fustratedParker

Hi folks,
Thanks for you quick response. Apologies for not clarifying enough what the changes are, let me break it down:

• I have added the initial two paragraphs from Johnersh, as the particulars of the claim don't even mention which bits of the contract are breached. They are paragraphs 1 and 2 in my defence. Is there any point in including this? If not I can cut it, of course.
  
• Paragraph 3 is taken verbatim from the template defence.
• Paragraph 4 is the equivalent of paragraph 2 in the template, where I state that I am the keeper, and also admit to being the driver. I'm not sure if I should add anything else here.
• In paragraph 5 I have explained how there are no markings on the ground that delimit the parking bay, so it is impossible to claim that I wasn't parked in a designated area. This is in my opinion one of my strongest arguments, so I welcome any feedback on how to make my point clearer - stronger.
• Paragraphs 6 and 7 are taken from a different example defence, referring to the fact that my lease does not mention any parking restrictions, and how I didn't consent to having my lease altered.
• Paragraphs 8 and 9 are taken from a different example defence, referring to the fact that the signage does not constitute an offer, only a prohibition.
• Paragraphs 10 to 29 are the rest of the template defence, with the only alteration is the added sentence in paragraph 24, where I refer to the fact that in the pictures provided by Link Parking in the SAR, the parking enforcer took a picture of the sign where one cannot read the details of the PCN, because of how small the writing is.

I hope that clarifies where I have made the changes. 

Redx said:

we normally see 2 paragraphs where changes have been made , not over 29 !!!

typically they are 2 & 3 only

I have added a few paragraphs where I outline my main points, ie: no markings for bays, not mentioned in my lease, signage is prohibitive. Should I make this into one paragraph with sub paragraphs?

KeithP said:

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

Upon what date did you file an Acknowledgment of Service?
Your MCOL Claim History will have the definitive answer to that.

The details from MCOL are as follows:

A claim was issued against you on 15/12/2020

Your acknowledgment of service was submitted on 03/01/2021 at 22:38:53

Your acknowledgment of service was received on 04/01/2021 at 08:06:29

The reason I took so long for the AoS is I was away over Christmas, I filed it the night I returned home online, hopeuflly not too late.

Coupon-mad said:

That is not the template defence!

I have only added to the sections around Paragraphs 2 and 3, and the first two regarding the very vague particulars of claim. Should I remove those first two, and combine my paragraphs 3 to 9 into a single one? Or remove some of those later paragraphs?

Finally, I forgot to mention, as I explained back in April ,the reason I have 4 PCNs is because I didn't see the car for a week as I was staying indoors as per the government guidance (and legislation) at the time. Is there any point writing about this?

As always, thank you for the help, and I welcome and feedback/questions/etc.

Cheers,

FP

Le_Kirk

Did you use this: -
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/76880595#Comment_76880595
as the basis for your defence?

nosferatu1001

Essentially - you start with the template and ONLY make changes to para other than 2 and 3 if they are required
we only see what you change. 

fustratedParker

Le_Kirk said:

Did you use this: -
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/76880595#Comment_76880595
as the basis for your defence?

Yes, that is the basis of my defence.

nosferatu1001 said:

Essentially - you start with the template and ONLY make changes to para other than 2 and 3 if they are required
we only see what you change. 

So as I mentioned above, I have added language referring to 3 main things: the bays not being marked, the lease not mentioning any parking regime, and the signs being prohibitive, which I believe are the bits that are particularly relevant to my case, in addition to them adding costs, distinguishing Beavis, etc. Should I try and condense these 3 points into a single paragraph 3? Or perhaps you don't think I should mention some of that at all?

Thanks again for your help. I'm not trying to be difficult by not following the template, I simply added the bits I thought were relevant to my case in paragraphs 3 to 9 as I thought having them all in a single paragraph would be worse.

Redx

So as I said earlier , only post the paragraphs from 2 onwards that you have changed or added

Start with 2 by coupon mad , requiring little change , it's either driver , or Keeper , or both Keeper and driver

Then post 3 onwards which you have changed , renumbering as you go due to multiple paragraphs

Once you have finished your paragraphs , paragraph 4 onwards by coupon mad changes number to say 10 so all the subsequent numbers get renumbered to the end

There is little point in expecting us to understand your explanation of what you have done

We want say 2 to 9 only , if those are what you have changed or added , the rest of the template stays unchanged apart from renumbering from say 10 onwards

Nobody is going to try to decipher your defence or explanations on why it does not follow the coupon mad pattern

fustratedParker

Hi folks,

Sorry again for the confusion. Here are the added/changed paragraphs:

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question but liability is denied. It is also admitted that the Defendant was the Driver of the vehicle, but again liability is denied.

3. The Claimant alleges that the vehicle was parked outside the confines of a marked bay, which cannot be true as there are no lines that delimit the area, instead it is marked by a plaque with a number on it. Around the property there are more parking areas that do not have lines nor plaques identifying them, yet parking is allowed therein. Such an inconsistent marking system cannot be a basis for a Claim.

4. It is denied that the Defendant or lawful users of his/her vehicle were in breach of any parking conditions or were not permitted to park in circumstances where an express permission to park had been granted to the Defendant permitting the above mentioned vehicle to be parked by the current occupier and leaseholder of [address], whose tenancy agreement permits the parking of vehicle(s) on land. The Defendant avers that there was an absolute entitlement to park deriving from the terms of the lease, which cannot be fettered by any alleged parking terms. The lease terms provide the right to park a vehicle in the relevant allocated bay, without limitation as to type of vehicle, ownership of vehicle, the user of the vehicle or the requirement to display a parking permit. A copy of the lease will be provided to the Court, together with witness evidence that prior permission to park had been given.

8. The Defendant avers that the operator’s signs cannot (i) override the existing rights enjoyed by residents and their visitors and (ii) that parking easements cannot retrospectively and unilaterally be restricted where provided for within the lease. The Defendant will rely upon the judgments on appeal of HHJ Harris QC in Jopson v Homeguard Services Ltd (2016) and of Sir Christopher Slade in K-Sultana Saeed v Plustrade Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 2011. The Court will be referred to further similar fact cases in the event that this matter proceeds to trial.

9. The signs displayed at the property offer no contract to people without a permit. The contract offer is only extended to those with a permit, therefore, there is no consideration flowing between the parties and the signs are prohibitive and do not offer a contract to those without a permit. In the absence of any consideration no contract exists.

10. This was reflected in the “PCM vs Bull” case, where Defendants were issued parking tickets for parking on private roads with signage stating “no parking at any time”. District Judge Glen in his final statement mentioned that “the notice was prohibitive, and didn’t communicate any offer of parking and that landowners may have claim in trespass, but that was not under consideration”.

22. The Claimant’s signs have vague/hidden terms and a mix of small font, such that they would be considered incapable of binding any person reading them under common contract law, and would also be considered void pursuant to Sch2 of the CRA. Indeed, in the pictures supporting the Claim that the Claimant provided, they supplied a picture of the sign, where the details of the terms cannot be read, as they are exceedingly small. Consequently, it is the Defendant’s position that no contract to pay an onerous penalty was seen, known or agreed.

I hope this clarifies things, and look forward to hearing any feedback you may have.
Cheers,
FP

Coupon-mad

Looks fine if you have added that to the current forum template, I can't argue with those points because they are valid for a resident.

KeithP

fustratedParker said:

KeithP said:

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

Upon what date did you file an Acknowledgment of Service?
Your MCOL Claim History will have the definitive answer to that.

The details from MCOL are as follows:

A claim was issued against you on 15/12/2020

Your acknowledgment of service was submitted on 03/01/2021 at 22:38:53

Your acknowledgment of service was received on 04/01/2021 at 08:06:29

The reason I took so long for the AoS is I was away over Christmas, I filed it the night I returned home online, hopeuflly not too late.

No, your AoS wasn't filed too late. Close though... you had until 4pm on 4th January to file it.

With a Claim Issue Date of 15th December, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 18th January 2021 to file your Defence.

That's less than a week away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence and it is good to see that you are not leaving it to the last minute.

To create a Defence, and then file a Defence by email, look at the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Don't miss the deadline for filing a Defence.