14 Weeks Before NTK Issued

Le_Kirk

I suspect the code (101) will be their internal code to make it easer to print PCNs.  If you are going to include that paragraph in your defence, change "I" to "the defendant" as defences are written in the third person.  You might say the terms are "void for impossibility".

Alleged

Redx said:

Let us see your proposed numbered draft of paragraphs 2 and 3 , for critique

Do not post the rest of the template defence , only your homework needs checking

Ok. Working on the amendments now. 
I hope it is okay to put the above mentioned at number 17 as it is post this statement in "16.          After receipt of the PCN (late) the Defendant went, as keeper, to carry out research and discovered the Claimant’s signs have...."
I just want it to be clear that the signs were only researched months after the event.

Alleged

2.         It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question but liability is denied. It is not known who the driver on the date in question was.

3.         The Defendant cannot be held liable due to the Claimant not complying with the ‘keeper liability’ requirements set out in the Protections of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4 which allows 14 days to provide the notice.

4.         The Defendant was first made aware of the situation over 100 days after the event had occurred.  The Notice To Keeper, sent to the Defendant as Registered Keeper, is dated as issued on 04/09/2020. The date of event is recorded as 27/05/2020; a difference of more than 14 WEEKS.

5.         Due to the long delay between the event & notice being provided the defendant was denied a reasonable chance to know from memory who the driver was.

6.         The defendant attempted to stop this claim at an early stage by using the Appeal procedure but was denied the possibility of completing that through the failure of the system the Claimant was providing. This possibly occurred due to the large timeframe between the event & the appeal being made
...........

16.       After receipt of the PCN (late) the Defendant went, as keeper, to carry out research and discovered the Claimant’s signs have vague/hidden terms and a mix of small font, such that they would be considered incapable of binding any person reading them under common contract law, and would also be considered void pursuant to Sch2 of the CRA.  Consequently, it is the Defendant’s position that no contract to pay an onerous penalty was seen, known, or agreed.

17.          The PCN NTK states the following: “Contravention Reason101) PARKED WITHOUT PAYMENT OF THE PARKING TARIFF FOR THE VEHICLE REGISTRATION MARK OF THE VEHICLE ON SITE

The Maximum period allowed at this site is 0 minutes”

"The Maximum period allowed at this site is 0 minutes" means that no parking is allowed. Further, the signpost T&C’s do not allow a driver to reject the T&C’s by leaving, after reading the complicated signage, as a parking charge notice will be issued for “failure to make payment within 5 minutes following entry to the car park/private land”. To be clear: even if a vehicle leaves within 5 minutes of entry the signage attempts to make the driver liable to pay the PCN as they did not make a payment. The T&C’s are therefore not fit for purpose & void for impossibility.

Alleged

Le_Kirk said:

I suspect the code (101) will be their internal code to make it easer to print PCNs.  If you are going to include that paragraph in your defence, change "I" to "the defendant" as defences are written in the third person.  You might say the terms are "void for impossibility".

Thanks.
That sounds so right. I know what I want statements to mean but struggle to write them with such clarity.
I have removed "I" by using the statement of KeithP. 
I will endeavour to keep using "the defendant" in place of I in future.

KeithP

Alleged said:

I have removed "I" by using the statement of KeithP. 

Oh... I wasn't providing a statement for your Defence when I wrote...

KeithP said:

Alternatively, "The Maximum period allowed at this site is 0 minutes" means that no parking is allowed.

...just giving an opinion of what those words in quotes might mean.

Jenni_D

And the only time you use the defendant is in the defence. At witness statement stage it becomes I as you are giving evidence from your own knowledge.

Alleged

KeithP said:

Alleged said:

I have removed "I" by using the statement of KeithP. 

Oh... I wasn't providing a statement for your Defence when I wrote...

KeithP said:

Alternatively, "The Maximum period allowed at this site is 0 minutes" means that no parking is allowed.

...just giving an opinion of what those words in quotes might mean.

OK. I will see if I can work that in whilst leaving the original explanation too.
I think that the statements, when read together, are trying to suggest that as no payment has been made then you have zero time as a grace period to park. 

Alleged

Is it just my optimistic view or actually the case that as Excel are trying to tie the driver in to a binding contract, Excel have to dot all the i's & cross all the t's at every stage? Surely failure to do that makes the contract void?

Alleged

Jenni_D said:

And the only time you use the defendant is in the defence. At witness statement stage it becomes I as you are giving evidence from your own knowledge.

Thank you. I will note that for the next stage as I was not aware.

Alleged

In the absence of further comments I will send the form off today.

Am I being pedantic in believing the claim reference should not be called the "Claim Number" (due to the inclusion of numerous letters) as it is on MCOL?