Britannia parking Plymouth.

Le_Kirk

It is good to inform yourself by reading, especially posts by other motorists with similar situations to yours.  The defence, using the standard defence template, should not take more than 20 minutes to half an hour.  Do not miss your defence deadline.

migmash

Le_Kirk said:

It is good to inform yourself by reading, especially posts by other motorists with similar situations to yours.  The defence, using the standard defence template, should not take more than 20 minutes to half an hour.  Do not miss your defence deadline.

Thanks Le Kirk, am on it . .  . 4PM Monday :-)

D_P_Dance

You sound like the sort of person who will stand up to these scammers.  Do not forget to complain to your MP y

migmash

D_P_Dance said:

You sound like the sort of person who will stand up to these scammers.  Do not forget to complain to your MP y

Will do  D P Dance, and i am watching out for the Government’s final Consultation that Coupon Mad has mentioned ;-)

migmash

Evening all,

                     just thought i would try a defence with the minimum use of any "driver/keeper" being used, or ideally if i re word it some more, lose any mention of them at all, or driver at least. Never sure if i am going on too much about the day/incident, and then nothing for WS?

               I am ready for the criticism, but hiding behind my Mum's apron . .     .  

IN THE COUNTY COURT

Claim No.:  XXXXXXXX

Between

Britannia Parking Group Limited. (Claimant)

T/A Britannia Parking Group,

7th Floor,

County Gates House,

300, Poole Road,

Poole BH12 1AZ. 

- and -  

Mr XXXXXXXXX (Defendant)

____________________

DEFENCE

____________________

1.       The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.  It is denied that a contract was entered into - by conduct or otherwise - whereby it was ‘agreed’ to pay a ‘parking charge’ and it is denied that this Claimant (understood to have a bare licence as managers) has standing to sue, nor to form contracts in their own name at the location.

The facts as known to the Defendant:

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

 3.     The car was being used on the day in question at a popular holiday destination in Plymouth, and whilst visiting the area the engine management light came up on the cars dashboard. It was then decided to pull off the road in to the parking site mentioned in the letter, and see what could be done if anything. As there was a long standing (40+ years) AA membership in place, it was decided to contact them, though wasn't sure if they could even get a van in the low ceiling parking site to help anyway.  

           The car was standing in the queue, hardly moving and overheating as the whole area was generally very busy. Once car was in building, it was just driven to one side, with steam coming from under the bonnet. No signal on mobile phone in there, so no AA call, but after about five minutes, all seemed better, and things cooled down enough to add water from the personal drinking containers in the car. This all took about 10  minutes, and passers-by had helped push the car to one side, to a neutral area on the site, so hadn't even used a parking bay!

            Car was then slowly driven back out to contact AA when signal working again and get repairs carried out, or Relay home. Upon leaving the car park,  and approaching the PDT machine to pay, it was asked  of  the 2 car park employees that appeared to be working on the machine at the entrance/exit "what seems to be wrong with the ticket machine if you have so many people queuing around you trying to pay" and the reply was a somewhat mumbled "doesn't seem to be taking payments"  Car was then driven away from the site, and proceeded to have it repaired.

            Keeper has only just seen correspondence from B W Legal, and the invoice from Britannia, and the Claim Form, as recently sold personal home (21/5/21, Sale details available)  that had been rented out for the past 9 Months or so, as keeper has been traveling in motor home since retirement.  All the usual utility bills and letters were taken care of by the tenant, and keeper was certainly not expecting to return to threatening letters from debt recovery agencies, a parking charge notice and a Claim Form to be taken to Court. Not to mention drivers credit history being threatened, and put in to disrepute.

               It would seem that a “A frustration of contract” has occurred due to the PDT machine not functioning at the time of the incident. Unfortunately it has not been possible to obtain a record of the functionality of the machine on that day, as when requested from Britannia, they refused to disclose such information.

Redx

2 needs expanding to include driver , so 

Keeper and driver , or , keeper but not the driver , or keeper but driver not known

The second to last paragraph , it's threats to the keeper as defendant , not to the driver

All paragraphs should have a number

Reads more like a witness statement than a defence , too much information

migmash

migmash said:

Evening all,

                     just thought i would try a defence with the minimum use of any "driver/keeper" being used, or ideally if i re word it some more, lose any mention of them at all, or driver at least. Never sure if i am going on too much about the day/incident, and then nothing for WS?

               I am ready for the criticism, but hiding behind my Mum's apron . .     .  

IN THE COUNTY COURT

Claim No.:  XXXXXXXX

Between

Britannia Parking Group Limited. (Claimant)

T/A Britannia Parking Group,

7th Floor,

County Gates House,

300, Poole Road,

Poole BH12 1AZ. 

- and -  

Mr XXXXXXXXX (Defendant)

____________________

DEFENCE

____________________

1.       The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.  It is denied that a contract was entered into - by conduct or otherwise - whereby it was ‘agreed’ to pay a ‘parking charge’ and it is denied that this Claimant (understood to have a bare licence as managers) has standing to sue, nor to form contracts in their own name at the location.

The facts as known to the Defendant:

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

 3.     The car was being used on the day in question at a popular holiday destination in Plymouth, and whilst visiting the area the engine management light came up on the cars dashboard. It was then decided to pull off the road in to the parking site mentioned in the letter, and see what could be done if anything. As there was a long standing (40+ years) AA membership in place, it was decided to contact them, though wasn't sure if they could even get a van in the low ceiling parking site to help anyway.  

           The car was standing in the queue, hardly moving and overheating as the whole area was generally very busy. Once car was in building, it was just driven to one side, with steam coming from under the bonnet. No signal on mobile phone in there, so no AA call, but after about five minutes, all seemed better, and things cooled down enough to add water from the personal drinking containers in the car. This all took about 10  minutes, and passers-by had helped push the car to one side, to a neutral area on the site, so hadn't even used a parking bay!

            Car was then slowly driven back out to contact AA when signal working again and get repairs carried out, or Relay home. Upon leaving the car park,  and approaching the PDT machine to pay, it was asked  of  the 2 car park employees that appeared to be working on the machine at the entrance/exit "what seems to be wrong with the ticket machine if you have so many people queuing around you trying to pay" and the reply was a somewhat mumbled "doesn't seem to be taking payments"  Car was then driven away from the site, and proceeded to have it repaired.

            Keeper has only just seen correspondence from B W Legal, and the invoice from Britannia, and the Claim Form, as recently sold personal home (21/5/21, Sale details available)  that had been rented out for the past 9 Months or so, as keeper has been traveling in motor home since retirement.  All the usual utility bills and letters were taken care of by the tenant, and keeper was certainly not expecting to return to threatening letters from debt recovery agencies, a parking charge notice and a Claim Form to be taken to Court. Not to mention drivers credit history being threatened, and put in to disrepute.

               It would seem that a “A frustration of contract” has occurred due to the PDT machine not functioning at the time of the incident. Unfortunately it has not been possible to obtain a record of the functionality of the machine on that day, as when requested from Britannia, they refused to disclose such information.

"machine not working"  

migmash

Redx said:

2 needs expanding to include driver , so 

Keeper and driver , or , keeper but not the driver , or keeper but driver not known

The second to last paragraph , it's threats to the keeper as defendant , not to the driver

All paragraphs should have a number

Reads more like a witness statement than a defence , too much information

Will be at it again in the morning, thanks

migmash

Coupon-mad said:

He means you didn’t put the full name of the Claimant company in your heading. I noticed it too but then forgot to mention it so I’m glad he did!

Is it possible to speak with a forum member by PM rather than put something on here for all to see (thinking more along the lines of nosey/interested debt collectors viewing) and then continue as normal and put my shortened defence on here for scrutiny, and possibly WS if needed yet?

                        Thanks again :-)

Le_Kirk

It is always recommended to keep everything on the forum, that way you don't run the risk of missing out on a regular's contribution, also the person to whom you send the PM may be off-forum for a few days.  Debt collectors can do nothing anyway so what if they see your defence.  The claimant (the one who matters) will see your defence anyway as soon (well 28 days later) as you send it to CCBC.