Highview Defence Assistance Please - Witness Statement Help Please - First Result on First Claim

Jinks_65

Hi again - and thank you for your help despite my ignorance/lack of research - I have looked at other threads, and was fortunate to find one for the same carpark!  I have redrafted my defence completely now, and would really appreciate comments - please note I am aware I had no other person on my insurance itself, but have always held fully comprehensive allowing other drivers (suitably covered themselves) to drive, and they have occasionally - not that I have my docs to hand from 2017, but is this sufficient to proceed on this route? Also I am not sure whether to refer to an unrecoverable appeal or not, as it could well be not the same thing - it's very confusing the claim as it does not detail anything about what the parking fine is for:

 

The facts as known to the Defendant:

2.       The Defendant was issued with a Claim Form by DCB Legal acting on behalf of the Claimant Highview Parking Limited for a Total amount of £266.04 (inclusive of £35 Court Fee & £50 legal representative's costs) to a £155 Parking Charge Notice or Notices (‘PCN’) plus damages.  The Claimant also claims interest at a rate of 8% per annum. The claim form states that this relates to a PCN that was issued against the Defendant’s vehicle xxx, over 4 years ago on 17 June 2017 at Bradfield Road Car Park, Sheffield.

3. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question, but liability is denied and any breach of terms is also denied. The identity of the driver at the material time is unknown to the Defendant. The Defendant was not the only person insured to drive the vehicle in question and is unable to recall who was, or was not, driving on that unremarkable day over 4 years ago.

(i)       The PCN was not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ('PoFA'), and it was therefore incapable of invoking the ‘keeper liability’ provisions set out in the PoFA, Schedule 4.  The Defendant's research has revealed that Highview is a parking firm which has chosen never to use 'keeper liability' wording (primarily as set out in para 9 of the POFA Sch 4) and whilst that is allowable by the DVLA, the registered keeper's data is only supplied for the limited purpose of a parking firm trying to ascertain who was driving.  The driver is the only liable party with a non-POFA PCN like this one.

4. The Defendant believes that the Notice to Keeper was not PoFA compliant and therefore incapable of holding the keeper liable with the ‘keeper liability’ requirements set out in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ('PoFA'), Schedule 4.

5. Following on from [4] where it is noted that the Claimant has elected not to comply with the 'keeper liability' requirements set out in PoFA, Claimant has included a clear falsehood in their POC which were signed under a statement of truth by the Claimant's legal representative who should know (as the Claimant undoubtedly does) that it is untrue to state that the Defendant is 'liable as keeper'.  This can never be the case with a Highview Parking Limited claim because this parking firm, in the same way as any Group Nexus company, have never used the POFA 2012 wording, of their own volition.  Not only does the POC include this misleading untruth, but the Claimant has also added an unidentified sum in false 'damages' to enhance the claims.  So sparse is their statement of case, that the Claimant has failed to even state any facts about the alleged breach or the amount of the parking charge that was on the signage, because it cannot have been over £100. The Claimant is put to strict proof of how they arrived at the Amount Claimed - a Total of £181.04. The Defendant has excluded the £35 Court Fee & £50 Legal Representative's costs from the total amount for the purposes of this defence point. 

6. The Parking and Traffic Appeals Service (PATAS) and Parking on Private Land Appeals (POPLA) lead adjudicator and barrister, Henry Michael Greenslade, clarified that with regards to keeper liability, “There is no ‘reasonable presumption’ in law that the registered keeper of a vehicle is the driver and the operators should never suggest anything of the sort” (POPLA report 2015).

Is this the end of the defence now, or is there other stuff to be added (barring statement of truth)?

Thank you.

Jinks_65

Oh - should I add there is no detail about the claimed 'breach' - doh?

Redx

Why is 2 now 3 ?

In the template defence , your 3 would be 2 , the rest would follow sequentially

If or when it's approved for submission , you slot it into the template defence , deleting the template defence 2 and 3 , then renumber

Glad to see you found a relevant discussion , as I said , nothing new here , it's almost always come up before

Coupon-mad

It looks fine to me and you don't need to mention the incoherent particulars as the template sort of covers that in what was #4, that you will need to renumber.  Job done.

KeithP

Jinks_65 said:

Hi - thank you for responding.
issue date 12 October
AOS 27 October

With a Claim Issue Date of 12th October, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 15th November 2021 to file your Defence.

Still a few days to go. 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.

Do not try and file a Defence via the MoneyClaimOnline website. Once an Acknowledgment of Service has been filed, the MCOL website should be treated as 'read only'.

Jinks_65

Hi again - I now have the allocation to small claims in my local court - but already a problem!

I am trying to submit the N159 response to court to say I don't want to have it on papers.  First attempt it refused my mail, so I tried a different heading.  Second attempt went through but I got the auto response with the following that I am not sure whether to address with a further mail/in person (if they need addressing):

1/ "If you are attaching a copy of an order from a hearing for the Court to process, please ensure that you are submitting it in Word format only."   I sent it as PDF - I have tried converting to word on my pc for a big fat fail, so should I now post it? take it in? or is PDF ok for the N159 or is it same as an order from a hearing and not ok? - I have till the 29th to get it in.

2/ "Please ensure that all correspondence is clearly marked in the subject line with the date and time of any hearing, the case number, and party names." - There is no date but I didn't put in the party names in the subject heading just the claim number and N159 - should I resubmit (whether PDF or word) with a better subject heading?

I also commented that I now have a second claim progressing at early stages - not sure if that was relevant but was told to mention it to court every time!

Thank you.

Coupon-mad

I'd put a copy in the post.

Jinks_65

Hi - thank you for all the help.  I am drafting my witness statement - to be in by 12 April.  I looked at one on here and notice that this one is responding to the claimant's information, eg/ claimant states signage is ..., which I do not actually have.  Do they provide that before mine - will I see it?

Le_Kirk

The claimant has the same deadline as you, therefore it is a case of who blinks first.  You can wait until just before the deadline in the hope that you get theirs first but don't miss the date!

Jinks_65

Hi - I have received a mail from DB Legal offering a discussion for one (or both) the pcns, it isn't clear which, but I understand that a/ I don't engage? but b/ I am open to sorting it out pre court? Is there a recommended response

Further query - I am doing my witness statement for overrunning time for the 2017 offence, however, I also now have the 2016 offence which was parking in a wrong area (followed by an appeal to which the answer of they sent to the old address I had rather than the new updated one!) - do I put all my defence for both PCNs into this one for 2017? Or do I just flag within the witness statement there is a further PCN? O is the most recent, as they've done some errors and signage for where/where not you can park was appalling and unclear.r do I actually do nothing and just flag on a covering letter?

Sadly, I believe I'd be much more likely to win the 2016 one which

Thank you.