Claim Form PCN

VERDIGO

I wonder if anyone can help me. I have received a Claim Form form a Gladstone Solicitors acting on behalf of Local Parking Security, issued 8/10/21. apparently my car was parked in breach of terms of parking at the Isle of Wight Zoo 24/8/20. We didn't see any signs on arrival nor did we think you would need to pay, we just thought it was attached to the Zoo which was empty, and parking would be free. To be honest I am not even sure I was driving as it was a family holiday and my wife and mother-in-law were dipping in/out of driving. The claim is for £100 for the PCN and £70 contractual costs, court fee and legal rep costs £50 = £269.17. I have acknowledged the claim with MCOL with my intention to defend. Doing some digging I don't even believe the car park is even owned by the claimant. Can anyone please help me formulate a defence, I have until tomorrow to do that Any help very much appreciated. 

D_P_Dance

PLease read the newbies 

They have added what appears to be an extra unlawful amount of £70 for debt collection. Judges have dismissed an entire claim because of this. Read this and complain to your MP.

Excel v Wilkinson

At the Bradford County Court, District Judge Claire Jackson (now HHJ Jackson, a Specialist Civil Circuit Judge) decided to hear a 'test case' a few months ago, where £60 had been added to a parking charge despite Judges up and down the country repeatedly disallowing that sum and warning parking firms not to waste court time with such spurious claims.   That case was Excel v Wilkinson: G4QZ465V, heard in July 2020 and leave to appeal was refused and that route was not pursued.  The Judge concluded that such claims are proceedings with 'an improper collateral purpose'.   This Judge - and others who have since copied her words and struck dozens of cases out in late 2020 and into 2021 - went into significant detail and concluded that parking operators (such as this Claimant) are seeking to circumvent CPR 27.14 as well as breaching the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   DJ Hickinbottom has recently struck more cases out in that court area, stating: ''I find that striking out this claim is the only appropriate manner in which the disapproval of the court can be shown''.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/16qovzulab1szem/G4QZ465V%20Excel%20v%20Wilkinson.pdf?dl=0

Also read this

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6279348/witness-statements-2-transcripts-re-parking-firms-false-costs-recorder-cohen-qc-judgment-2021/p1

 

Redx

Use the defence template post by coupon mad at the top of the forum in announcements , adapting paragraphs 2 and 3 and post the draft below , but only your adaptations , not the rest of the Defence , it's your homework being checked , not coupon mads !

Check your claim history on MCOL and post the details below , copy and paste

Email a SAR to the DPO at LPS to obtain all your data attaching a copy of the claim form as proof of I D under the GDPR law

Car parks are rarely owned by the claimant , although I fail to see what the relevance is !  The claimant is a contractor on behalf of the landowner

Le_Kirk

You seem surprised that you received a claim form!  Did you not receive PCN, debt collector letters, letter before/of claim?  Maybe your address is not up-to-date on your V5C.  Is it?  Don't guess, check.

VERDIGO

Thank Redx, I cant seem to find that link. I am sorry I'm a complete novice on here. I just mentioned about the claimant not owning the car park as I thought might have some relevance with my defence.

VERDIGO

Not suprised @Le_Kirk, but I did not think it was lawful on advice from a friend who told me to ignore it. My details are correct on V5C.

Le_Kirk

VERDIGO said:

Thank Redx, I cant seem to find that link. I am sorry I'm a complete novice on here. I just mentioned about the claimant not owning the car park as I thought might have some relevance with my defence.

One click back to the first page of the forum and there are up to five announcements with RED/Purple banners, one of them is the defence template.  Another is the NEWBIE sticky.  You may not see them if you are using  mobile rather than a PC/Tablet.

Redx

VERDIGO said:

Not suprised @Le_Kirk, but I did not think it was lawful on advice from a friend who told me to ignore it. My details are correct on V5C.

Is this friend prepared to pay the judgment if you lose in court ?

Friends who know nothing about the topic should zip it ! 😋😋😜😜

They could have cost you hundreds of pounds !

Tell them to read the Barry Beavis case from 6 years ago before offering foolish advice again

https://www.lawble.co.uk/parking-eye-vs-beavis-law-on-parking-penalties/


Use a laptop , not a phone , To navigate this forum

There are several announcements at the top of this forum , one is the Defence template thread by coupon mad

Another one is the newbies FAQ sticky thread

Read both , especially page one in each , they are there with all the basic advice that you need , but are useless unless read 👍👍

Ps , it's an unpaid invoice from a business , what did you expect them to do about the unpaid bill ? Of course they will sue you , it's what they all do !

VERDIGO

Thank Redx, I have found the defence kindly provided by Coupon-mad, but I am unsure how to word. 3. as to show there was simply no clear signage and we presumed it was free parking.  I also honestly do not know who would have been driving as my wife and mother-in law took turns. I have searched online for said signs, but cant find any photos.

4-18 I will keep as per the defence shown.

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. It is not known if the Defendant was driving the vehicle at the time in question. 

3.  is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question but liability is denied. It is not known if the Defendant was driving the vehicle at the time in question

Redx

2 is about who was driving or not , not 3

For 2) Use wording from previous defences where you are the keeper but the driver is unknown and could be one of several drivers , so it needs clarifying

You are expected to complete 3 yourself , the rest is one for you , imagine if there was no template , nightmare , so you are being asked to provide 10% of the paragraphs at most , so please don't complain about doing 2 out of 17 paragraphs 😜😜😭😭

Ps, you should be studying previously approved defences , over the last 2 years , to get the gist

3) is not the same as 2)

VERDIGO

Redx , thank you for your help. I am sorry if you feel frustrated with me that is certainly not my intention. I have been looking for previous defences over the last 48hrs but just do not seem to be coming across anything relevant.