No return within 90 minutes PCN

go-on-then

This refers to a parking charge notice issued for a car park in local town centre.  To be brief, a letter of defence has been submitted ( put together using info on here thank you ) and acknowledged and now awaiting DQ.  The usual £60 has been added on the claim form so that has been pointed out in the defence and hopefully will get the claim struck out. Time will tell.

I have a couple of questions that I hope someone may be able to answer, or point me in the right direction please.
 The particulars of claim on the claim form state that ' the vehicle parked in breach of terms of parking......thus incurring the parking charge.  However,  the reason for issue for the PCN is given as ' vehicle returned within a no return period of 90 minutes' . This is contradictory   shouldn't the reasons be the same ??  Also  the appeal rejection letter ( no shock there)  states '  the PCN was correctly issued as your vehicle was parked in a way which breaches the terms and conditions of parking '  .  No evidence is given anywhere as to how the vehicle wasnt parked properly ( def wasnt ) 
Only 2 poor quality , almost black, photos are shown on the PCN ( could have been taken anywhere )  and only 2 times are given and the duration of stay.  This isn't evidence of a return ?  Should there be a picture of the sign they allege the charge refers to or not ? 

Hope that makes sense. Many thanks for any help given.

KeithP

The particulars of claim on the claim form state that ' the vehicle parked in breach of terms of parking......thus incurring the parking charge.  However,  the reason for issue for the PCN is given as ' vehicle returned within a no return period of 90 minutes' . This is contradictory...

Surely they are suggesting that the second time the vehicle was parked it "was parked in a way which breaches the terms and conditions of parking" by actually being parked a second time.

go-on-then

Thanks for the quick reply.  I see what you are saying but if the 'offence' is returning to the car park, the vehicle doesnt have to park , it could just go in and out again, therefore how can they say it 'parked'  in breach etc ??  

Coupon-mad

Which PPC?

The evidence in parking claims is invariably shaky, with rubbish photos; that's partly why we keep winning!

Please show us your defence, word for word.  Was it the Feb 2020 template defence, suitably edited?

go-on-then

Very sorry but I am unable to post my defence on here   it was hand written as I do  not have access to a laptop and I really struggle,  as I imagine a lot of people do,  with the terminology etc anyway.  Doing PDF stuff and all that isnt in my capabilities !! I read all the current stuff and set it out as advised etc and as far as I am aware I don't think I have shot myself in the foot,  admitting to anything etc. buf if anything is wrong then my  bad. I didn't quote anything I wasnt sure of.  Sorry.  I am just grateful for the help on here and am aware of what to look for etc etc thanks to this forum. 

As I mentioned, ES have added the unlawful  £60 contractual costs which I referred to in the defence. Am I allowed to add comments onto the DQ or attach a sheet to it , to further highlight the added costs,  in the hope it will be struck out on this point , or is this not necessary ??   Do claims ever get struck out at this stage or do they have to get further down the line ? 
Thank you.

go-on-then

I was also going to attach the 6 pages of the Southampton case with the DQ if that is allowed ?? 

Coupon-mad

Yes that is OK, I have suggested people do that, and put in the covering email that you ask that a Judge reviews the facts before allocation and invokes the courts' duty under s71 of the Consumer Rights Act, given that there are sufficient facts known to expose this exaggerated claim as an abuse of process.

And repeat that at each stage.

D_P_Dance

Alleged no return BOC  claims  are very difficult for the PPC to win in court.  IIRC, nne have been won for several years.  Such claims may well breach your human rights under the Human Rights Act or constitute an unfair term or condition under the Consumer Rights Act 2015..  A judge may also regard them as trivial, read this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_minimis
  
Let us suppose your brand new £300 Panama blows off site, do you not retrieve it?   Of cours you do.  Has the PPC been damaged?  Of course not.  IMO the PPC would be daft to take this to court. 

Nine times out of ten these tickets are scams, so consider complaining to your MP, 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, when life gets back to normal, it will become impossible for those scammers who are left to continue their vile trade, but until this is done you should still complain to your MP, citing the new legislation.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/enacted

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

.

nosferatu1001

Not sure how a panama blowing off helps with no return - no leaving site maybe?
No return clauses are a real problem, because they will  allege the driver broke the contract, but would have to PROIVE the driver was the same in both cases...

go-on-then

Coupon-mad  I have no idea how to do the DQ by email sorry, that is why I asked if it is acceptable to send things with the DQ that I will fill in and return. When I get it. I have already received the solicitors copy. 
I think I will be able to post a copy of my defence on here later today , I can get help with this. 
Thanks for all replies.

D_P_Dance

Not sure how a panama blowing off helps with no return - no leaving site maybe?

Precisely.  For Panama substitute £50 note, important papers, a child running off, an  RTA off site.

Another scenario might a driver parks and catches bus home.  Husband/wife.,  who is shopping on site drives car home. 

It is called thinking outside the box,  not necessary for auditors perhaps, but a sine qua non for Diplomats.   All explained here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking_outside_the_box