County Court Defence - Review Please

nosferatu1001

They are at best corp members. But they're not aos members. They're bound by the IPC cop

akso
a cop does not let them breach law. The cra says they cannot charge this 

Le_Kirk

Whichever team they belong to, the code of practice to which they refer is made up by them and their boy's club; it is a CoP by which they are bound to operate, not the motorist and it isn't law!

RubyRhubarb

Do you know if there is anything in the IPC COP that allows them to make extra charges?

Do you have any specific references to the CRA that I can use?

Other than Britannia vs Crosby, any other court rulings?

Were_Doomed

https://theipc.info/resources/brandings/brandmedia_2_Code-of-Practice.pdf
Why not take a read? (Part E, Schedule 5 for a start ...  very woolly though).

KeithP

RubyRhubarb said:

Do you have any specific references to the CRA that I can use?

Does your Defence mention "the CRA 2015 s62, 63 and 67"?

RubyRhubarb

KeithP said:

RubyRhubarb said:

Do you have any specific references to the CRA that I can use?

Does your Defence mention "the CRA 2015 s62, 63 and 67"?

Only specifically s71(2):

the charge offends against Schedule 2 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (‘the CRA’), where s71(2) creates a duty on the Court to consider the fairness of a consumer contract.

The Court is invited to exercise its case management powers pursuant to CPR 3.4 to strike out this claim, which is entirely tainted by abuse of process and breaches of the CRA.

...considered void pursuant to Schedule 2 of the CRA.

the alleged ‘debt’ exceeds the £100 ATA CoP ceiling is disallowed under the CPRs, the Beavis case, the POFA and the CRA

RubyRhubarb

Were_Doomed said:

https://theipc.info/resources/brandings/brandmedia_2_Code-of-Practice.pdf
Why not take a read? (Part E, Schedule 5 for a start ...  very woolly though).

The only thing the IPC Cop mentions is "Where there is a prospect of additional charges, reference should be made to this where appropriate on the signage."

Interesting read though because I have found they have fallen foul of their own code in several places.

IPA COP

Part B

(8.1) All Parking Charges issued by you must be reasonable and enforceable under any applicable legal provisions.
If your charges amount to damages you should be able to demonstrate how such charges are calculated for each site as a ‘genuine pre-estimate of loss’ in order to be able to justify the amounts.

Part E - Parking Charges

 if the motorist uses the land in breach of the terms and conditions they thereby agree to pay a fixed fee by way of damages to the
operator.

It is suggested the maximum parking charge should be: £100.

Where there is a prospect of additional charges, reference should be made to this where appropriate on the signage.

Coupon-mad

RubyRhubarb said:

Do you know if there is anything in the IPC COP that allows them to make extra charges?

Do you have any specific references to the CRA that I can use?

Other than Britannia vs Crosby, any other court rulings?

The template defence and example WS in the NEWBIES thread both give you the ParkingEye v Somerfield High court case that deals with the fact that adding £60 is unjustified, punitive and an unrecoverable sum.

Who cares that the self-serving IPC CoP suggests PPCs can add an unlawful sum of money?

KeithP

RubyRhubarb said:

KeithP said:

RubyRhubarb said:

Do you have any specific references to the CRA that I can use?

Does your Defence mention "the CRA 2015 s62, 63 and 67"?

Only specifically s71(2):

Then read paragraph 7 of the current template Defence.

RubyRhubarb

Is there a cap on what I can ask in further costs, pursuant to CPR 44.11? As I'm sure I've spent well over 16hrs on preparing for this case.