OPS - Vantage Point

KeithP

With a Claim Issue Date of 8th March, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 12th April 2021 to file your Defence.

That's nearly 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 at the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Don't miss the deadline for filing a Defence.

fishsoup

This is what I'm going to put in addition to the standard template for my defence....does this seem appropriate?

2.   It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question but liability is denied.  

3. The driver tried to purchase a ticket with cash, but the machine was not working so a ticket could not be purchased, therefore making any legally binding contract void. 

4. The terms on the Claimant's signage are displayed in a font which is too small to be read from a passing vehicle and is in such a position that anyone attempting to read the tiny font would be unable to do so easily. It is, therefore, denied that the Claimant's signage can create a legally binding contract.

5.1 The Claimant is put to strict proof that it has sufficient proprietary interest in the land, or that it has the necessary authorisation from the landowner to issue parking tickets through use of a PDT machine, parking charge notices, and to pursue payment by means of litigation. 

5.2 One Parking Solution's two main directors were prosecuted and found guilty in 2017 of being directors of a prohibited company named Assured Security Solutions. This is evidence they are rogue traders and as seen above, are not operating a fully compliant and legal operation under the alternative name of One Parking Solution, who are ignoring a wide range of basic legal requirements in running their practice.

blackdog2220

5.2 One Parking Solution's two main directors were prosecuted and found guilty in 2017 of being directors of a prohibited company named Assured Security Solutions. This is evidence they are rogue traders and as seen above, are not operating a fully compliant and legal operation under the alternative name of One Parking Solution, who are ignoring a wide range of basic legal requirements in running their practice.

why not add Ritchard branson was once charged with fraud (tax fraud many yrs ago )

One Parking Solution, who are ignoring a wide range of basic legal requirements in running their practice.

rubbish , both the BPA and the DVLA think the sun shines out of there ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, sand castle 

regarding one parking , leave the last bit out

leave it out 

Fruitcake

As above, leave out 5.2.

As for paras 4 and 5.1. surely they are already covered elsewhere in the template defence.

Coupon-mad

Yes, those points are already in the defence template, and all we are asking you to add are the facts, yet you are guessing and writing it as if this is definitely what happened even though you told us in this thread, that you have no idea:

 The driver tried to purchase a ticket with cash, but the machine was not working so a ticket could not be purchased,

The Judge will ask, and so I will ask now, why didn't you just leave?  i.e. why do people think they can park anyway?

And for the love of GOD why use Vantage Point car park?  Horrible place to choose to park in Brighton, you don't have to park there.  I never have when in the City.

nosferatu1001

In 2 if you are keeping silent about the drivers ID, be prepared in case y9ou are directly asked in court. 
 therefore making any legally binding contract void. 
No. It makes any offered contract void for impossibility

fishsoup

Coupon-mad said:

Yes, those points are already in the defence template, and all we are asking you to add are the facts, yet you are guessing and writing it as if this is definitely what happened even though you told us in this thread, that you have no idea:

 The driver tried to purchase a ticket with cash, but the machine was not working so a ticket could not be purchased,

The Judge will ask, and so I will ask now, why didn't you just leave?  i.e. why do people think they can park anyway?

And for the love of GOD why use Vantage Point car park?  Horrible place to choose to park in Brighton, you don't have to park there.  I never have when in the City.

I didnt say I had no idea but this was two years ago! I wouldn't deliberately not purchase a ticket, the machine must have not been working. 

I didn't leave because I had to take my son to a party - for which I would have been late - in Sammi Circus, which is next door. It was convenient car park.

Shall I take part 2 out then?

fishsoup

nosferatu1001 said:

In 2 if you are keeping silent about the drivers ID, be prepared in case y9ou are directly asked in court. 
 therefore making any legally binding contract void. 
No. It makes any offered contract void for impossibility

When I read the POFa2012 it appeared they had complied with this, then that means liability transfers to the keeper?

fishsoup

I thought I read 99% of cases are won here, I just want to know how to give myself the best chance of not paying this claim. Thanks.

nosferatu1001

If they HAVE complied with POFA - and we havent seen their NtK, so cant check - then the Keeper can be responsible for the drivers actions, which is stupid but thatas this crazy POFA law. 

We all know youre not wanting to pay. Thats obvious. But you have to help yourself, as this is your defence, not ours.