PCN Claim Form

is_data

Hi everyone, complete newbie here. My friend has received a "formal letter of claim" from QDR – instructed by ZZPS on behalf of National Car Parks (the PPC). This is referring to multiple PCN's dated 2015/16 on my friend’s vehicle no longer owned.

 

A little background about the tickets being claimed for by QDR/ZZPS - 12 windscreen PCN’s in total at a London Underground station majority for parking without clearly displaying the required ticket. I know my friend is an idiot for getting that many. However, my friend was unable to deal with the PCN’s due to going through a nasty divorce/separation at the time which also included a financial burden of the split. (I know that it may not be the best reason for ignoring the PCN’s however my friend was really at their wits’ end trying to hold on to a job and manage matters at home as well.

 

Steps taken so far: having read the NEWBIES post, submitted a SAR to NCP and sent an email to QDR advising them of the SAR requested. In the almost 100-page response to the SAR, the PPC have provided a vast number of pictures and NTK’s which my friend has no recollection of having received in the first place. In the SAR, there were 2 NTK’s out of the 12 which were missing, I mean the PPC did not provide copies of two NTK’s. Since then, my friend has received the claim form from CCBC Northampton with an issue date of 12 March 2021.

 

I suppose the reason that I'm posting this is to ask whether my friend has any possibility of defending themselves to at least reduce the costs applied here: each PCN has been bumped up by additional £100 with no explanation provided. It is safe to assume that these costs are applied by ZZPS and/or QDR.

Apologies in advance if there is already a post covering all of this, I'm only trying to help out my friend and do understand that there are deadlines to meet.

Fruitcake

On behalf of ZZPS means they are debt collector letter and can safely be ignored as the fourth post of the NEWBIES explains.


The car park may be subject to byelaws, so you need to determine this. If this is the case, the keeper cannot be held liable, so it is imperative that the driver's identity is not revealed.

The court claim needs to be acknowledged after day 5 (AoS) as per the guide to court written by bargepole that you will find in the second post of the NEWBIES. A defence then needs to be produced by using the ready written template in the sticky threads. Only paragraphs 2 and 3 of the template need amending, and only those two need posting here for checking.

nosferatu1001

Of course it can be defended. 
1) What is the earliest dated PCN? Date of incident, nothing else. 
2) IF the defendant has no recollection of who drove, and is OK saying they have no recolelctiron - for example them, their ex, their kids etc could have driven - then if it is TRULY an underground station car park then no keeper liabilty applies and that is a complete defence to the claim. They would have to PROVE he was the driver on EVERY occasion for their claim to succeed. 
3) You know, from the newbies thread, that the additional amoutns are unlawful
ALL they can lawfully claim is:
- full PCN amount, obv not discounted
- fee  to the court to file the claim
- fee to their solicitors to file the claim, max £50
- if it gets to a hearing, the hearing fee
So tell us precisely the breakdown of what they are claiming. It is in the particulars of claim.
4) Follow the newbies thread post 2 to acknowledge the claim ON DAY 5

KeithP

There is a very good Defence here - as long as the driver's details remain unknown to the Claimant.
All London Underground station car parks are covered by Railway Bylaws and as such are not 'relevant land' as defined in Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

is_data said:

...my friend has received the claim form from CCBC Northampton with an issue date of 12 March 2021.

With a Claim Issue Date of 12th March, you have until Wednesday 31st March to file an Acknowledgment of Service. If possible, do not file an AoS before 18th March, but otherwise, there is nothing to be gained by delaying it. 

To file an AoS, follow the guidance in the Dropbox file linked from the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Having filed an AoS in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Wednesday 14th April 2021 to file your Defence.

That's over four weeks away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence, but please don't leave it to the last minute.

To create a Defence, and then file a Defence by email, look again at the second post on the NEWBIES thread - immediately following where you found the Acknowledgment of Service instructions.

Don't miss the deadline for filing an Acknowledgment of Service, nor that for filing a Defence.

Of course everywhere I have written 'you' or 'your' I mean the named Defendant.

Fruitcake

The comments about not relevant land only apply if the car park belonged to the London Underground, and not a private car park such as in a retail park or private city centre car park.

It is imperative therefore to determine who owns the car park. A station belonging to TFL/London Underground should have signs saying it is such.

KeithP

Of course @Fruitcake is right.

OP, can you please tell us exactly where the vehicle was parked?
Maybe a Google Street View image?

is_data

nosferatu1001 said:

Of course it can be defended. 
1) What is the earliest dated PCN? Date of incident, nothing else. 
2) IF the defendant has no recollection of who drove, and is OK saying they have no recolelctiron - for example them, their ex, their kids etc could have driven - then if it is TRULY an underground station car park then no keeper liabilty applies and that is a complete defence to the claim. They would have to PROVE he was the driver on EVERY occasion for their claim to succeed. 
3) You know, from the newbies thread, that the additional amoutns are unlawful
ALL they can lawfully claim is:
- full PCN amount, obv not discounted
- fee  to the court to file the claim
- fee to their solicitors to file the claim, max £50
- if it gets to a hearing, the hearing fee
So tell us precisely the breakdown of what they are claiming. It is in the particulars of claim.
4) Follow the newbies thread post 2 to acknowledge the claim ON DAY 5

1) July 2015
2) Going by the number of PCN’s it will be difficult to ascertain for sure. The particulars of claim section on the claim form from the CCBC states amongst other things that “the defendant was the driver of the vehicle in relation to each contravention…”
3) Amount claimed: £196 instead of £100 per PCN, Court fee: £105, Legal costs: £80. Total: £2.5k

is_data

KeithP said:

Of course @Fruitcake is right.
OP, can you please tell us exactly where the vehicle was parked?
Maybe a Google Street View image?

South Woodford Station Car Park, South Woodford, London E18 1JJ

KeithP

is_data said:

nosferatu1001 said:

Of course it can be defended. 
1) What is the earliest dated PCN? Date of incident, nothing else. 
2) IF the defendant has no recollection of who drove, and is OK saying they have no recolelctiron - for example them, their ex, their kids etc could have driven - then if it is TRULY an underground station car park then no keeper liabilty applies and that is a complete defence to the claim. They would have to PROVE he was the driver on EVERY occasion for their claim to succeed. 
3) You know, from the newbies thread, that the additional amoutns are unlawful
ALL they can lawfully claim is:
- full PCN amount, obv not discounted
- fee  to the court to file the claim
- fee to their solicitors to file the claim, max £50
- if it gets to a hearing, the hearing fee
So tell us precisely the breakdown of what they are claiming. It is in the particulars of claim.
4) Follow the newbies thread post 2 to acknowledge the claim ON DAY 5

The particulars of claim section on the claim form from the CCBC states amongst other things that “the defendant was the driver of the vehicle in relation to each contravention…”

But have you told them that or are they just assuming...?

nosferatu1001

1) damn, was hoping it was past limitation of 6 years. 
2) Wow, it really makes that statement? IN that case, in para 2, the defendant admits to being the keeper - if true - but states they cannot confirm who was the driver on each occasion, and puts the claimant to strict proof of the drivers identity. Tat presumes that NO appeals were EVER made. Can you confirm that, for sure? Appeals may have given away the drivers identity. 
3) Oof, they havent got a hope. So drop £96 off each, what does that get you to? 

nosferatu1001

...and dont forget, if tyhe total sum claimable (not claimed!) is now lower than 2.5k, that might mean the filing fee has dropped as well
Legal costs arent permitted to be £80?! Chedck for YOURSELF by looking this up in the CPRs. Legal costs to file a claim. not conduct a claim