One parking Solution taking me to court.

Redx

Pedant , there is no S in the word Defence , change your keyboard to uk English

Jackanory stories are submitted in the WS in several months time , as are the costs in a summary costs assessment , along with the exhibits

Your Defence is about why you as keeper have no liability

Any further court claims for outstanding PCN s can be conjoined to this one by asking the judge to do so , to combine all claims into one

The claimant is expected to issue one claim for all outstanding PCN s

Johnersh

This should be really simple and a bit punchy. No-one needs a lengthy story. The statement is for that. 

I was thinking of something like this. *caution: this is your defence, no mine. So for goodness sake check it, fill in the blanks, adapt or wholly rewrite it as you see fit*
I've simply assumed punchy defence. As others have said, you could add a counterclaim if you think you can establish harassment. 

SUMMARY
1. It is admitted that the defendant is the RK of vehicle registration xxxxxx 
2. It is denied that the RK was the driver of the vehicle or is liable to the claimant for the sums specified, whether as RK of the vehicle, or at all. 

PARKING EVENT(S) 
3. Whilst such matters are not within the direct knowledge of the Defendant, it is admitted that between x and y dates vehicle registration xxxxxx was parked at [location address].
4. It is further admitted that pre-action correspondence was entered into with the claimant regarding various parking charge notices ("the PCNs"), as specified in the particulars of claim.
5. It is neither admitted nor denied that parking charge notices were affixed to the RKs vehicle, since such matters are not within her own knowledge. 

PRE-ACTION CORRESPONDENCE 
6. The Defendant relies upon her correspondence with the claimant pursuant to the Protocol for pre-action debt claims, dated xxxxx. In that correspondence, the Defendant stated, inter alia:
6.1. That the Defendant was not the driver of vehicle registration xxxxx on the dates specified in the PCNs
6.2. That the driver of the vehicle on the dates in question was her son, namely Mr xxxxxx. 
6.3. That the address by which her son could be contacted was yyyyyyyy. 

7. The Claimant's case is pleaded in the alternative, seeking to pursue a claim against the Defendant as driver and/or registered keeper. 

DRIVER LIABILITY 
8. The Defendant was not the driver. The Defendant denies liability. 
9. The Claimant has brought proceedings against an incorrect defendant, notwithstanding the notification provided to them. 

LIABILITY AS REGISTERED KEEPER
10.The Defendant will rely upon Schedule 4, s.5(1)(b) Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ("the Act") which strictly regulates the basis upon which private parking companies may transfer liability to the keeper. The relevant section permits a parking creditor to pursue a registered keeper only where the creditor:
is unable to take steps to enforce that requirement against the driver because the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver.
11. The Defendant put the Claimant on notice of the driver's identity and address prior to the issue of these proceedings on [date]. 
12. In circumstances where a name and address are provided, the Act only permits a parking creditor to pursue a keeper (i.e. to disregard that notification) where court proceedings have already commenced by the time of that notification. 
13. The Defendant avers that in providing the information set out in paragraph 6 above, she discharged any obligation that she may have to the Claimant as keeper, before proceedings were issued.
14. It is averred that there is no statutory, contractual or other basis for a claim to be brought against the Defendant as RK. 

QUANTUM AND INTEREST
15. Without prejudice to the foregoing, the Claimant is put to proof that any parking signs or contracts permit them to seek enhanced costs of £ xx per PCN
16. The interest calculations appear to be incorrectly applied and calculated notwithstanding the various dates of the PCNs and the later application of what appears to be a punitive sum of liquidated damages. 

PRAYER
17. Liability is denied.
18. For the reasons set out above, the Defendant avers that the Claimant's claim is entirely without merit and has no reasonable prospects of success. 
19. The Defendant reserves the right to seek costs pursuant to CPR 27.14(2)(g) if this litigation is further pursued where, in all the circumstances, it is unreasonable to do so. 

Coupon-mad

You've just had a draft defence written by a solicitor for you - note the caveat that the above is not 'legal advice' but it is Johnersh's suggestion and I would bite his hand off and use that, and OPS will give up.  If they don't and this gets to a hearing, I'd happily lay rep this for you in Brighton, as I have for many people. I can explain the POFA to a Judge and have done, and have won cases purely on a POFA point more than once.

The above defence only holds good if you did provide OPS or their solicitors with your son's full name and postal address, prior to the claim being issued.

You may wish to add an alternative defence point that the signage is very sparse and there is no entrance sign at all. contrary to the BPA Code of Practice.

Obviously it requires a statement of truth at the bottom and the headings at the top, as per the template defence example.  And you won't be putting this in on MCOL, you email a defence as the template defence thread explains, to improve the formatting/appearance and in order to accommodate more words that the rubbishy MCOL defence box would.  DO NOT TOUCH THAT.

Johnersh

Fwiw my thought with sparse signs etc is that it's difficult to argue those when the o/p was not the driver or entering into the contract. Totally simplified to the facts here. 

The templates have excellent standard points, but I always suggest tailoring to your facts. 

As @Coupon-mad says, you can only succeed taking the points in the above defence if you really can whip out a letter or email as the "smoking gun" showing that the ppc had everything they needed. 

Whilst checking or amending do refer throughout to the Registered Keeper (not RK - I'm lazy)

fwesh

Johnersh said:

This should be really simple and a bit punchy. No-one needs a lengthy story. The statement is for that. 

I was thinking of something like this. *caution: this is your defence, no mine. So for goodness sake check it, fill in the blanks, adapt or wholly rewrite it as you see fit*
I've simply assumed punchy defence. As others have said, you could add a counterclaim if you think you can establish harassment. 

SUMMARY
1. It is admitted that the defendant is the RK of vehicle registration xxxxxx 
2. It is denied that the RK was the driver of the vehicle or is liable to the claimant for the sums specified, whether as RK of the vehicle, or at all. 

PARKING EVENT(S) 
3. Whilst such matters are not within the direct knowledge of the Defendant, it is admitted that between x and y dates vehicle registration xxxxxx was parked at [location address].
4. It is further admitted that pre-action correspondence was entered into with the claimant regarding various parking charge notices ("the PCNs"), as specified in the particulars of claim.
5. It is neither admitted nor denied that parking charge notices were affixed to the RKs vehicle, since such matters are not within her own knowledge. 

PRE-ACTION CORRESPONDENCE 
6. The defendant relies upon her correspondence with the claimant pursuant to the Protocol for pre-action debt claims, dated xxxxx. In that correspondence, the defendant stated, inter alia:
6.1. That the defendant was not the driver of vehicle registration xxxxx on the dates specified in the PCNs
6.2. That the driver of the vehicle on the dates in question was, her son, namely xxxxxx. 
6.3. That the address by which her son could be contacted was yyyyyyyy. 

7. The Claimant's case is pleaded in the alternative, seeking to pursue a claim against the claimant as driver and/or registered keeper. 

DRIVER LIABILITY 
8. The Defendant was not the driver. The Defendant denies liability. 
9. The Claimant has brought proceedings against an incorrect defendant, notwithstanding the notification provided. 

LIABILITY AS REGISTERED KEEPER
10.The Defendant will rely upon Schedule 4, s.5(1)(b) Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ("the Act") which strictly regulates the basis upon which private parking companies may transfer liability to the keeper. The relevant section permits a parking creditor to pursue a registered keeper only where the creditor:
is unable to take steps to enforce that requirement against the driver because the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver.
11. The Defendant put the Claimant on notice of the driver's identity and address prior to the issue of these proceedings on [date]. 
12. In circumstances where a name and address are provided, the Act only permits a parking creditor to pursue a keeper (i.e. to disregard that notification) where court proceedings have already commenced by the time of that notification. 
13. The Defendant avers that in providing the information set out in paragraph 6 above, she discharged any obligation that she may have to the Claimant as keeper, before proceedings were issued.
14. It is averred that there is no statutory, contractual or other basis for a claim to be brought against the Defendant as RK. 

QUANTUM AND INTEREST
15. Without prejudice to the foregoing, the Claimant is put to proof that any parking signs or contracts permit them to seek enhanced costs of £ xx per PCN
16. The interest calculations appear to be incorrectly applied and calculated notwithstanding the various dates of the PCNs and the later application of what appears to be a punitive sum of liquidated damages. 

PRAYER
17. Liability is denied.
18. For the reasons set out above, the Defendant avers that the Claimant's claim is entirely without merit and has no reasonable prospects of success. 
19. The Defendant reserves the right to seek costs pursuant to CPR 27.14(2)(g) if this litigation is further pursued where, in all the circumstances, it is unreasonable to do so. 

I cannot tell you how bloody grateful I am for this amazing help! The law is a confusing landscape for us non legals, full of pitfalls and traps, I can only liken it to asking a non linguist to translate Don Quixote using a Collins hand dictionary!  You have done my translation and lifted a massive burden.   I have all the emails and letters (this goes in the witness statement from what I have learnt)  which were written over a year ago, son has since moved from that address but I'll let them sort that one out....I hope this gives OPS a big, big headache.  (many thanks again.)

fwesh

Coupon-mad said:

You've just had a draft defence written by a solicitor for you - note the caveat that the above is not 'legal advice' but it is Johnersh's suggestion and I would bite his hand off and use that, and OPS will give up.  If they don't and this gets to a hearing, I'd happily lay rep this for you in Brighton, as I have for many people. I can explain the POFA to a Judge and have done, and have won cases purely on a POFA point more than once.

The above defence only holds good if you did provide OPS or their solicitors with your son's full name and postal address, prior to the claim being issued.

You may wish to add an alternative defence point that the signage is very sparse and there is no entrance sign at all. contrary to the BPA Code of Practice.

Obviously it requires a statement of truth at the bottom and the headings at the top, as per the template defence example.  And you won't be putting this in on MCOL, you email a defence as the template defence thread explains, to improve the formatting/appearance and in order to accommodate more words that the rubbishy MCOL defence box would.  DO NOT TOUCH THAT.

I have them all here!  Thank you so much Coupon Mad and when/if this goes to court  (I'm guessing it will) I would love to to take up your offer to help me deal with this, my sister owns a cafe nearby that can be our watering hole!  Should I drop the Abuse of Process btw? (this has just popped into my head)

Fruitcake

If there are fake add-ons then keep it in. I believe it is now referred to as double recovery though rather than abuse of process.

Johnersh

15. Covers the add ons.

The court can exercise its discretion under cpr part 3 to strike out on the basis that there are no prospects or for abuse of process at any stage. 

Redx

Wow , all I can say is well done to the big guns above and you should definitely use that defence , subject to proof reading it and ensuring that it fits the facts known to you. As Johnnersh pointed out above , you alter 15 to suit the double recovery charges , which is what they are , you alter anything else to suit as well , but you keep over 95% of it intact and unchanged !!

Luv to see the faces on those fools at OPS when they read that final defence draft 😁😁😁😄😂

Coupon-mad

fwesh said:

Coupon-mad said:

You've just had a draft defence written by a solicitor for you - note the caveat that the above is not 'legal advice' but it is Johnersh's suggestion and I would bite his hand off and use that, and OPS will give up.  If they don't and this gets to a hearing, I'd happily lay rep this for you in Brighton, as I have for many people. I can explain the POFA to a Judge and have done, and have won cases purely on a POFA point more than once.

The above defence only holds good if you did provide OPS or their solicitors with your son's full name and postal address, prior to the claim being issued.

You may wish to add an alternative defence point that the signage is very sparse and there is no entrance sign at all. contrary to the BPA Code of Practice.

Obviously it requires a statement of truth at the bottom and the headings at the top, as per the template defence example.  And you won't be putting this in on MCOL, you email a defence as the template defence thread explains, to improve the formatting/appearance and in order to accommodate more words that the rubbishy MCOL defence box would.  DO NOT TOUCH THAT.

I have them all here!  Thank you so much Coupon Mad and when/if this goes to court  (I'm guessing it will) I would love to to take up your offer to help me deal with this, my sister owns a cafe nearby that can be our watering hole!  Should I drop the Abuse of Process btw? (this has just popped into my head)

Happy to meet at a Brighton cafe and that's what I usually do, then we walk to the court together.   Albeit more hearings are being done remotely by phone or CVP now, but I've done those during this past year as well.  I can assist as long as I am not working at the time (I am currently working but the job is temporary).  Like many regulars here, I can argue and explain the POFA with my eyes closed.

I think you will see this one discontinued. I don't think you will have a hearing.  I see them giving up just prior to it.

Don't forget @Johnersh's draft needs the headings added to the top and the statement of truth, signature of Defendant and the date at the bottom, then save the (electronically or hand) signed version as a PDF and attach it to an email to the CCBCAQ email addy that the template defence sticky thread gives you. 

Don't forget as well, that by naming your son as you did, there is nothing to stop them serving a claim on your son and he DOES need to give them his current address to ensure he doesn't get a nasty secret CCJ that he discovers too late, that wrecks his credit rating because he never saw a claim form in time to defend.  HIs defence would include the sparse signs!