Civil Enforcement - "On Claim for Debt"

Redx

2 should say lessee and driver , if defending as the driver

Nosferatu is correct , you made up some fictional facts there in 3
Stick to actual truth , no parking company states a loss of £100 , it's a daily default tariff enforced against a breach of the parking rules

Any loss is where a vehicle parks and fails to pay the correct Parking tariff on a pdt machine , depriving the machine operator of the correct payment of say £5 for 4.5 hours , the figure that would be paid to an attendant on duty as in years ago

Check the NTK PCN and claim form for what is being alleged , don't write their claim details out , you are defending yourself , not restating their claim. Do not compare £3 to £100 as disproportionate , it's not , it's the allowed tariff versus the default daily tariff

A tram fare in Manchester has a daily default tariff of £100 , but a £3 paid for ticket means a discounted rate applies to people who pay their correct fare , meaning a 97% discount applies

Justme2020

nosferatu1001 said:

No brackets. A defence asserts, a WS proves. Of course you prove your assertions later, so no need to say now

Dont say it suggested! It states charges from 7am to 7pm, no charge for later an d  no mention on the payment machine that other terms were applicable after 7pm

Did they "claim for loss"? really? Or did they in fact send an invoice for a parking charge, stating contrary to the signage that charges applioed 24 horus per day. 

" The Claimant believes that they have incurred a loss of £100, which would have been reduced to £60 if paid in 14 days,"
I bet they have never, ever said that. 

"that an offence has been committed "
They never said that. 

Where does £3 come from? Dont make up a tarrif that may have been applicable
"No l;oss" is effectively dead since PE v Beavis 2015

Removed the brackets, working on the other bits.

The fee is £1.50 per hour. I paid £1.50 from 18:00.

They stated that I didn't depart until almost 21:00 so an additional 2 hrs @ £1.50 is the £3.00

nosferatu1001

But dont talk about that fee. It isnt relevant, as youare not arguing "no loss" 
Can you show us the full sign now?

Redx

Then you state that you paid the correct tariff of £1.50 for the hour starting at 1800 to 1900 and the sign indicated no tariffs applied after 1900 so you were led to believe that nothing is paid for those extra 2 hours and they were free. 

Misleading signage , frustration of contract , confusing terms when comparing the signage to the assertions by the parking company , a breach of the CRA 2015 where ambiguous terms are interpreted in favour of the consumer

Justme2020

2.    The Defendant is the lessee and driver of the vehicle and liability is denied.

3. The Defendant arrived at these premises at approximately 18:00 on a dark evening and observed the label on the Parking Ticket machine which stated that a fee is only due until 19:00, of which photographic evidence is available. A fee was paid of £1.50 to cover the period from 18:00 to 19:00. The Defendant was then presented with an invoice from the Claimant for £100, alleging that rates are payable 24hrs a day and that the Defendant overstayed the paid period by approximately 2 hours. The Claimant’s invoice would have been reduced to £60 if paid in 14 days, however, the Defendant does not acknowledge that an offence has been committed or that such an invoice is warranted and that the amount claimed is far disproportionate to any tariffs allegedly not paid on the date in question (£1.50 per hour x 2 hours = £3.00). 

Getting better?

Redx

Delete the sentence after 2 hours

nosferatu1001

3. The Defendant arrived at the location at approximately 18:00 on a dark evening and read the sign on the Parking Ticket machine which stated that charges apply from 7.00 to 19.00. The correct £1.50 fee was paid to cover the period from 18:00 to 19:00, and the defendant left at 21.00. The Claimant sent an invoice alleging that rates are payable 24hrs a day. 

Already said not to call it an offence, no need to mention the dicount as its completel;y irrelevant. 

Justme2020

nosferatu1001 said:

3. The Defendant arrived at the location at approximately 18:00 on a dark evening and read the sign on the Parking Ticket machine which stated that charges apply from 7.00 to 19.00. The correct £1.50 fee was paid to cover the period from 18:00 to 19:00, and the defendant left at 21.00. The Claimant sent an invoice alleging that rates are payable 24hrs a day. 

Already said not to call it an offence, no need to mention the dicount as its completel;y irrelevant. 

Thank you. I've reworded as per your suggestion.
Should I add some of @Redx suggestions "Misleading signage , frustration of contract , confusing terms when comparing the signage to the assertions by the parking company , a breach of the CRA 2015 where ambiguous terms are interpreted in favour of the consumer"
RE: Signage. I have the photo of the sign supplied by CEL from my SAR but that could've been taken 18 months after the incident. I can share that if it helps?
Thank you again.

nosferatu1001

Yes, of course, and I already covered those.
I was just making it clear the background - para 3 -and then iin a NEW para 4 you can point out the abovce
I dont see how frustration applies, in this case. You saw a contract that said charges until 7pm and thats what you did

SUrely you havea  less zoomed in photo!? 
I have already said - YOU KNOW IF IT HELPS! We dont! We dont know what it says,, vs what you recall.

Redx

The obvious confusion over timings of either being 12 hours or 24 hours means I thought that you were unable to comply with the terms quoted on the NTK , so frustration of that contract , because your and our interpretation of the signage contract show a different agreed contract , meaning you cannot comply with their interpretations when the signs do not convey it

Arguing your case with exhibits is done at the WS stage and in court , so by all means set the scene in your defence , concisely , not waffling on , just remember you are introducing arguments for later on , you defend your pself , but your jackanory is in several months time. So only say words to support your interpretation of signs , stop stating their case

Your new 2 and the 3 provided by Nosferatu , do most of it

Add a 4 , concisely , with parts of what I said , but leave the waffle for the WS