PCM (UK) Ltd Claim Form from County Court Business Centre (Northampton)

nattyq · 26 June 2020 at 2:46PM

Hello All - can I please ask for some advice:

I did the AOS last Friday, 19th June, and then did the SAR to PCM (UK) Ltd; there was no email address for the DPO and so I just filled in their online form (confirmed it was received.)
I haven't received a response from them and am conscious that time is ticking to prepare my defence. I was thinking of calling them up to speak to the DPO / make the request again, but was wondering if that was wise (have seen people advised not to speak to them elsewhere.)

Thanks in advance.

Le_Kirk · 26 June 2020 at 3:33PM

Companies have 30 days to respond to a SAR. Your defence will not rely on the outcome of a SAR anyway, that will be more useful to you at witness statement stage. Look for some standard defences in the NEWBIE sticky second post or, if they are claiming the spurious admin/debt/contractual costs, just use the standard defence template for Abuse of Process found at the beginning of the second post: -
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6108153/suggested-template-defence-to-adapt-for-all-parking-charge-cases-where-they-add-false-admin-costs/p1

Coupon-mad · 26 June 2020 at 5:43PM

Who cares about the SAR, it will arrive but you don't need it for the defence. NEVER phone a PPC.

nattyq · 4 July 2020 at 6:04PM

Thank you everyone - I'm doing the defence this weekend.

Redx · 4 July 2020 at 6:31PM

nattyq said:

Thank you everyone - I'm doing the defence this weekend.

I should hope so , you on!y have 4 days keft

nattyq · 5 July 2020 at 2:07AM

Hello All,
I have a question about Sections 17 & 18 (copied below) on the defence template please, as follows:

I'm going to keep the bits in Section 17, as I was not the one driving at the time.
However, when I then complete Section 18 (where I'm going to mention that a parking session was actually registered as soon as my partner went up to his sister's apartment etc) won't that contradict Section 17, where I'm saying the dates/details in question are a bit vague in my mind?

I don't know if I'm over-thinking the details but don't want to make myself look silly in my defence!

Thanks in advance

**Include this template point below as your #17**

ONLY IF TRUE FOR YOUR CASE - IF NOT, YOU MUST CHANGE IT TO SUIT YOUR FACTS. If it is all correct then change the red to black and remove this comment!

17. The Defendant is not the only driver of this vehicle and the Particulars of Claim offer little to shed light on the alleged breach, which relates to an unremarkable date some time ago. It is not established thus far, whether there was a single parking event, or whether the vehicle was caught by predatory ticketing and/or by using unsynchronised timings and camera evidence to suggest a contravention. A compliant Notice to Keeper (‘NTK’) was not properly served in strict accordance with section 8 or 9 (as the case may be) of the POFA.

**Add this denial, ONLY if you were NOT driving (do not lie or leave it in by mistake!):

Whilst it is admitted that the Defendant was the keeper, they were not the driver of the vehicle at the time. Further, the mandatory requirements to establish 'keeper liability' have not been met and the Defendant is not liable in law.

If you have a good case otherwise and are sure that you are NOT able to (or wanting to) rely upon 'non-compliance with the POFA' (= especially relevant in 'non-POFA NTK' cases from Smart Parking, VCS, Excel, Civil Enforcement, CP Plus, Horizon, Highview, smaller PPCs and 'years old' cases from the likes of Britannia and OPS) and want to admit to being the driver (or if you already have ) change it to admit that the Defendant was the driver.

**Continue with more facts here for point #18 – talk about the car park and facts but not using ‘’I’’ or ‘’me’’** and remove this comment!

18. e.g. you might talk about having a permit or 'permission' to park; or an attempt being made to pay but the app or machine didn't work; or the driver/passenger being disabled and needing more time under the Equality Act 2010; or in residential cases, your primacy of contract and your lease; or maybe the ATA grace periods were breached; or the fact it was dark/rainy and no signs were seen; or that it was far from clear how driver could exempt their vehicle using a hidden keypad they knew nothing about/was not working).

Careful not to 'blab' about being the driver if you are intending to rely upon the POFA!

nosferatu1001 · 5 July 2020 at 11:01AM

It dies instruct you, very clearly, to change it if needed. Obviously you do not contradict yourself. That's a bad idea.

Coupon-mad · 5 July 2020 at 8:18PM

Yes it contradicts it - so change #17 to explain that you were not the driver (and how you know that - e.g. you were at work and a family member was using the car for their own daily errands, not acting on your behalf, but with your agreement, and being properly insured of course). And quote the IPC Code of Practice about grace periods and point out that the predatory ticketer took photos in x minutes flat.