Helping out my folks with 2 PCN's. MOTO/Roadchef - CP Plus / DCB Legal

Helpingmyfolks

Please be gentle. Totally out of my comfort zone with this. Feels like I've just copied and pasted a bunch of words and tried to make sense of it.

1st draft. Have I made a complete hash of it? (FYI formatting not completed)

Helpingmyfolks

ermmm. How do I attach the word document/pdf?

Redx

Helpingmyfolks said:

ermmm. How do I attach the word document/pdf?

you cannot attach a pdf document here , is the simple answer , MSE do not allow word docx or pdf attachments to your replies, or to ours either

people are being gentle, you should do what we tell you to do, not what you think should be done , courts follow certain procedures, all set out on the government website, but not simple to understand , so if you try to do something that you should not do, you will be told not to do it

Helpingmyfolks

Redx said:

people are being gentle, you should do what we tell you to do, not what you think should be done.

I know. The people here are salt of the earth type.
What I meant was that my WS feels inadequate and I don't want my father to get dressed down by the judge because of it.

This is the opening (apologies for the length):

Sequence of events 

1.     It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question but liability is denied as I was not the driver.

2.     This claim relates to alleged parking charge dated 21/10/15. At no time since these dates have I ever received any correspondence from CP Plus Ltd seeking payment and therefore had no opportunity to deal with the matter in a timely way.

3.     The claim form date 21/04/21 gives dates, location and a registration number. I’ve not been provided with any documentary evidence such as make and model or photographic images, so as to determine whether this is indeed a valid claim. 

4.     I have had several contract hire vehicles (I no longer have the vehicle relating to this claim). These contract hire vehicles are primarily used by someone else for work purposes. I've received and settled previous parking charges in the past, including ones to CP Plus Ltd. I’m aware that at least two of those charges were inappropriately issued as parking was paid for at the time (when challenged, the notices were withdrawn).

I would not have been the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged offences. Having not been sent a parking charge notice, I have not been offered the opportunity to pay them or challenge their validity.

5.     I contacted CP Plus Ltd for a Subject Access Request (SAR) on 2nd June 2021. They are legally required to respond within 30 days. I had to email the on the 6th July (over the 30 day deadline) to prompt them. Additionally, I reported my concern for this breach of behaviour to the Information Commissioners office. 

On the 9th of July, 37 days after my initial request I received a response. 

6.     I am of the belief that having previously received and paid PCN’s from CP Plus in the past, they've automatically sent the PCN in question to the address they had on record (xxxxx).Information from the SAR showing the first correspondence sent on the 10/2/16, second on the 29/2/16 and third on 17/3/16.

As DVLA records can only be requested once per 'offence', I am led to believe that as they received no response, they suspended action.

Almost six years later, (approaching the deadline where PCN's can be prosecuted) Upon checking the DVLA database they realised I had been living at xxxx since March 2015. Something they would have noticed had they checked when the event in question occurred. 

7.     I have felt extremely intimidated by very little correspondence I have received from the claimants and not complying with the ‘keeper liability’ requirements set out in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4, I cannot be held liable for these charges/claim.

8.     In light of the fact the correspondence wasn’t sent to my address (as it was updated with DVLA) CP Plus Ltd have filed to comply with multiple stipulations, which make their claim null and void:

Schedule 4 of the POFA

(2) The notice must—

(a) specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates. It did not.

(b) inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking and that the parking charges have not been paid in full; The only correspondence received did not include this. Only details of prosecution.

(e) state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper—(i)to pay the unpaid parking charges; or (ii)if the keeper was not the driver of the vehicle, to notify the creditor of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and to pass the notice on to the driver. They failed to comply with this.

(4)The notice must be given by—

(b)sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period. Failed to do so.

 

10.  Should the Operator try to suggest that there is any other method whereby a vehicle’s keeper (or hirer) can be held liable for a charge where a driver is not identified, I draw POPLA’s attention to the guidance given to operators in POPLA's 2015 Annual Report by Henry Greenslade, Chief Adjudicator in which he reminded them of a keeper's (or hirer's) right not to name the driver whilst still not being held liable for an unpaid parking charge under Schedule 4 of POFA. Although I trust that POPLA's assessors are already very familiar with the contents of this report, for ease of reference I set out a link as follows:

 

I draw POPLA’s particular attention to the section entitled “Keeper Liability” in which Mr. Greenslade explains that: --------------


I'll stop there.

Umkomaas

There are no 'I', 'me' or 'myself' in a defence. Always 'The Defendant'. 

Castle

Umkomaas said:

There are no 'I', 'me' or 'myself' in a defence. Always 'The Defendant'. 

It is at the Witness Statement stage now.

Umkomaas

Castle said:

Umkomaas said:

There are no 'I', 'me' or 'myself' in a defence. Always 'The Defendant'. 

It is at the Witness Statement stage now.

@Helpingmyfolks - ignore my prior post. Thanks to @Castle for picking it up. 'I', 'me' and 'myself' all good in a WS. 

Le_Kirk

5.     I contacted CP Plus Ltd for a Subject Access Request (SAR) on 2nd June 2021

Better as: -

5.     I contacted for submitted a Subject Access Request (SAR) to CP Plus Ltd on 2nd June 2021. 

Redx

The bottom part mentions Popla , and popla assessors , I have no Idea why it's there , greenslade yes , but popla ?

Your father is addressing the court , not POPLA

Castle

Helpingmyfolks said:

Been reading through the forum like a madman last night. 

Essentially. Two parking charges from 21/10/2015 & 14/01/2016.
The vehicle was a lease in my parents name (used by a different family member). My parents moved property in March 2015 (seven months before the first PCN). DVLA were informed of the updated way before then but I think the Volkswagen (the lease company) were never informed of the address change...stupid I know.

So what relevance does Volkswagen have to this if your Father was the Registered Keeper?