Claim form received, please I need guidance!

KeithP

No, as I wrote earlier, you have until 30th November to file a Defence.

It was three weeks ago that I wrote that.

At this time I would respectfully suggest that filing a Defence on time should be your first priority, and only then think about sending a Subject Access Request to the parking company.

Coupon-mad

Just reply back to the DPO and ask for a SAR now and reminding them that they know you are the right data subject.

Le_Kirk

Any info that comes from a SAR will be more useful to you at witness Statement stage, so get on with defence first, then SAR.  Don't forget to attach a scan of your V5C to any SAR submission.

pawless_patrol

Thank you all for your comments. I have now a draft of points 2 and 3 of my Defence:

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 in question at the time of the alleged incident.

3.         The Defendant visited this retail carpark on the day of the alleged incident with her child to browse goods in one of the shops, buy groceries at the supermarket and have a meal at the restaurant, all of which are reasonable activities which are assumed are performed by most visitors to this retail park. This resulted in the Defendant unbeknownstly overstaying the allowed maximum stay of 90 minutes at the premises.

 The maximum allowed time of 90 minutes is unusually short, and it is not enough time to reasonably perform shopping & leisure activities in this retail park without incurring in a breach to the terms and conditions as set by the Claimant. Although it is understandable that the landowner has the right to decide what is the time limit for free parking on his/her land, this unusual short period should have enforced the need for the signage in place to display prominently the maximum time allocated for free parking and the amount to pay as parking charge. On the contrary, the signage in place does not comply with the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice (CoP) requirements in terms of font size, consequently failing to engage the attention of visitors and failing to make visitors aware of the fact that there is a limited time for free parking and the maximum time allowed (standard Group I wording described on the BPA CoP) as well as failing to appropriately inform that there will be a parking charge in the event of breaching terms and conditions (standard Group 2 wording described on the BPA CoP). It is, therefore, denied that the Claimant's signage is sufficiently appropriate for creating a legally binding contract due to its misleading and obfuscating nature.

The issue with unclear signage is brought up on later points, therefore I wonder whether this is too repetitive.

pawless_patrol

I also should point out that I received another letter from bwlegal stating that if I didn't pay or provide a valid reason for not paying, they will "enter a CCJ against you". I cannot thank all of you enough for enlighten me and many others about the scary bs from these companies, as otherwise it would have been really stressful to read that. Now it just made me chuckle... 

Coupon-mad

The Defendant saw signs where the largest font size highlighted “Private land” and “Terms & conditions”, with smaller, inconspicuous text below.

Did you REALLY see the sign? Think about it, you went shopping.  Are you telling me you DID notice the inconspicuous sign, and that you turned away from the road and read that, because it really caught your eye as you drove in?  I'd be surprised, personally.  If I am right then remove the above because you DIDN'T see signs.

 The Defendant therefore assumed a standard 3hs of allowed parking as usual in most retail parks with supermarkets and eating facilities.

Remove that - NEVER say you 'assumed' a time limit.  You didn't.  If I am right, you knew the car park was free and saw no other terms and made no assumptions.

pawless_patrol

Your are right Coupon-mad. I didn't see the signs at all. 
I will remove the comment about the assumption as well, thanks!

Redx

Lol here in da north 3 hours is not a normal period for parking , far from it !!

I would never make that assumption , supermarkets vary from 90 minutes to 3 hours , my local Retail park is 4 hours , etc

One shared car park in Hyde has 3 regimes in place with 3 different types of signage . One for each zone , the CEL zone for KFC is 90 minutes when they are open 7 days a week , the other 2 zones are pay and display , one council zone is free on Sunday all day but pay and display 6 days a week , confusing ? Definitely

Never assume and never tell assessors that assumptions were made

Drivers should check signage and abide by it , wherever it is located

1505grandad

Opening post states:-

".........................regarding an unpaid parking charge notice from UKPPO."

UK Parking Patrol Office Ltd (Trading As UK Parking Patrol Office) are IPC AoS members  -  so no point mentioning BPA in the Defence.

Coupon-mad

I assume you Googled Wembley retail ukppo and found the zillions of forum posts about that parking scam site.