Court Claim - UKPC - Defence Statement

billymcdafthead

Hello everyone, I have been silently browsing the forum since April, as we began to receive payment demand letters from DCBL back in April 2021. I have followed the advice on the sticky posts and responded to the Letter before Claim by using a SAR to UKPC. 

We have now had a Court Claim come through and I have used the coupon-mad template. 

Bit of Background: 

• The ticket itself is from April 2016. 
• We never received any NTK and although UKPC's photos show a charge was put on the vehicle, we have never received a parking fine - ever!!! 
• The alleged contravention is that we parked in an "Unauthorised area"
• The Estate we were parked on is near a Halfords Autocentre's that we used regularly as our vehicle (that received the penalty) kept breaking down. The vehicle was scrapped in August 2016. 
• We have used a SAR to get data from Halfords, but they cannot prove we were there on the of the charge (but we have proof from a different day that year). 
• My husband worked nearby to Halfords, but had free parking elsewhere and has never needed to park on the Estate. 
• We have tried to identify the landowner with no luck.
• We have not approached Halfords, as we wanted to confirm if they could provide us proof we were there legitimately first, which they cannot. 
• We have complained to our MP today.
• The pictures provided by UKPC are blurry and although there is a sign behind where we are parked, you cannot see what it says. 
• DCB Legal sent us a pdf image of what the terms of parking were at the time, however these are undated and clearly differ from those now enforced on the site (you can tell by the pattern of the text on the terms behind our vehicle)
• 2016 probably was one of the worst years of our lives so far, with deaths in the family and my husband had a motorcycle accident the same year, so this has bought back a lot of stress from that year having to go over dates / times etc. 
• The date of the Claim form is 24/11/2021
• We acknowledged service on 27/11/2021

(I think that is all the points usually asked on each post)

I have completed the first draft of the Defence, however I am not sure if we have written too much. Could someone please have a look for me please and give me some pointers? I have only included parts 1-3 to save mass spamming of this post:

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. The defendant’s husband was the driver as the defendant had had a C- Section only 81 days prior to the PCN.
 
3.       The defendant first became aware of this claim on 01/04/2021 when she received an Unpaid parking charge of £160. This came as a massive shock to the defendant as this was the first letter that she had received and the date of contravention was five (5) years ago. The car had also been scrapped in August 2016 due to vehicle constantly breaking down due to mechanical faults.
·       The Defendant was aware of the location the charge relates to as she and her husband had used the Halfords Auto Centre located at Muirhead Quay on the Fresh Wharf Estate during the period that the ticket was issued due to their constant car troubles.
·       The Defendant asked her Husband regarding the claim, however he was also unsure what they related to but assumed it could be linked to their use of Halfords Autocentres.
·       2016 was an incredibly difficult year for both the Defendant and her husband. They had purchased a vehicle that kept breaking down, they had their first baby, they were informed of the death of her husband’s estranged father, her husband lost his Grandfather to Cancer whom he was very close to and then had a motorcycle accident himself, whereby he hit his head, suffering Concussion and Post Concussion syndrome, resulting in time off work and caused slight memory loss causing incredible strain to their relationship. Since his accident the defendant’s husband suffers with Anxiety and Depression but continues to balance a full time job to support his family.
·       The Defendant is an NHS worker and a full time mother and did not respond to the 2021 letters sent by DCBL legal due to not believing they were valid claims. The defendant continued to receive three further demands for £160 for a fine over five (5) years old from DCBL causing further stress and anxiety to an already busy work and home life.
·       On 27/08/2021 the defendant received a Letter of Claim from DCB Legal and at this point the defendant realised that this was a legitimate claim and began responding to DCB Legal and UKPC through SAR requests to obtain further details regarding the claim.
·       Although an Notice to keeper was apparently sent, none were ever received by the defendant and the first time she was made aware of the claim was on 01/04/2021. Any letters received have been kept since the 01/04/2021.
·       UKPC have been asked to provide evidence showing the alleged contravention, however have failed to show any significant evidence that shows the contravention of parking in “an unauthorised area”. Their documentary evidence is not dated and the pictures provided by UKPC are blurry and do not show the terms of parking as they were in 2016.
·       The defendant’s position is that they were parked at the location legitimately in connection with Halfords Autocentes.
·       DCB Legal has attempted to provide false evidence to the defendant via email in order to convince her to pay the fine. This is unacceptable behavior by any company and will be raised in the Witness Statement.
·       At point four (4) of the Particulars of Claim on the N1 form the Claimant has stated that the defendant had agreed to pay within 28 days, however no agreement was ever made and this is another example of DCB Legal’s wrongful claims. The defendant was not made aware of this claim until five (5) years after the alleged contravention.
·       The defendant is a law abiding citizen and has never had anything like this against her. She is currently studying at University part time whilst also juggling her part time NHS role and looking after her five (5) year old son. This claim has taken her away from her studies to focus on contesting this claim that is false and has caused her additional stress during an already stressful time in her life.
·       The defendant denies any wrongdoing and will be happy to provide the evidence mentioned above.

Picture of vehicle and sign shown in the background (I have only provided one as the rest are the same and blurry):



The "terms" that DCB Legal sent me. These were not provided by UKPC on the SAR request and when we told DCB Legal to cease contact with us, they sent us these "terms" which are not dated. The pattern of the text in the picture above, does not match the terms below (namely the middle part with the blue "JAN 24 VISITOR" part) 



Site Map, which again was not provided by UKPC, but was provided by DCB Legal when we informed them to cease all contact:



I hope this is enough information to help us. 

Thanks in advance. 

KeithP

billymcdafthead said:

• The date of the Claim form is 24/11/2021
• We acknowledged service on 27/11/2021

Hello and welcome.

It is never a good idea to file an Acknowledgment of Service less that five days after the Claim Issue Date, but in this case, because of Christmas holidays, it doesn't matter.

With a Claim Issue Date of 24th November, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Wednesday 29th December 2021 to file your Defence.

That's over four weeks away. 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'.

Le_Kirk

You don't send evidence (such as pictures) with the defence, that comes later at witness statement stage - all explained in the NEWBIE sticky second post.

billymcdafthead

Le_Kirk said:

You don't send evidence (such as pictures) with the defence, that comes later at witness statement stage - all explained in the NEWBIE sticky second post.

Yes, I saw that on the stickies. It’s more for context for the defence I’ve written. 

I’ve used the template as per the sticky and the wording I’ve used is quoted in my first post. I haven’t copied over the full template and just points 1,2 and 3. Is the wording too much? Shall I reduce it? What shall I keep in / remove?

Thanks in advance 

Coupon-mad

I'd remove all of this which is for the witness statement:

 2016 was an incredibly difficult year for both the Defendant and her husband. They had purchased a vehicle that kept breaking down, they had their first baby, they were informed of the death of her husband’s estranged father, her husband lost his Grandfather to Cancer whom he was very close to and then had a motorcycle accident himself, whereby he hit his head, suffering Concussion and Post Concussion syndrome, resulting in time off work and caused slight memory loss causing incredible strain to their relationship. Since his accident the defendant’s husband suffers with Anxiety and Depression but continues to balance a full time job to support his family.
·       The Defendant is an NHS worker and a full time mother and did not respond to the 2021 letters sent by DCBL legal due to not believing they were valid claims. The defendant continued to receive three further demands for £160 for a fine over five (5) years old from DCBL causing further stress and anxiety to an already busy work and home life.
·       On 27/08/2021 the defendant received a Letter of Claim from DCB Legal and at this point the defendant realised that this was a legitimate claim and began responding to DCB Legal and UKPC through SAR requests to obtain further details regarding the claim.
·       Although an Notice to keeper was apparently sent, none were ever received by the defendant and the first time she was made aware of the claim was on 01/04/2021. Any letters received have been kept since the 01/04/2021.
·       UKPC have been asked to provide evidence showing the alleged contravention, however have failed to show any significant evidence that shows the contravention of parking in “an unauthorised area”. Their documentary evidence is not dated and the pictures provided by UKPC are blurry and do not show the terms of parking as they were in 2016.
·       The defendant’s position is that they were parked at the location legitimately in connection with Halfords Autocentes.
·       DCB Legal has attempted to provide false evidence to the defendant via email in order to convince her to pay the fine. This is unacceptable behavior by any company and will be raised in the Witness Statement.
·       At point four (4) of the Particulars of Claim on the N1 form the Claimant has stated that the defendant had agreed to pay within 28 days, however no agreement was ever made and this is another example of DCB Legal’s wrongful claims. The defendant was not made aware of this claim until five (5) years after the alleged contravention.
·       The defendant is a law abiding citizen and has never had anything like this against her. She is currently studying at University part time whilst also juggling her part time NHS role and looking after her five (5) year old son. This claim has taken her away from her studies to focus on contesting this claim that is false and has caused her additional stress during an already stressful time in her life.
·       The defendant denies any wrongdoing and will be happy to provide the evidence mentioned above.

Just replace it with a couple of sentences denying that any terms were breached or that Halfords issued visitor permits.  Vehicles were de facto authorised if drivers were patrons of Halfords and there would have been no other reason for the D's husband to stop there because he had free parking at work...nearby (have I remembered that right?).

Any chance the vehicle was left with Halfords one day, who would have been the keeper that  day, and one of their employees could have parked it there?  Had you both thought about that?

Le_Kirk

billymcdafthead said:

Le_Kirk said:

You don't send evidence (such as pictures) with the defence, that comes later at witness statement stage - all explained in the NEWBIE sticky second post.

Yes, I saw that on the stickies. It’s more for context for the defence I’ve written. 

I’ve used the template as per the sticky and the wording I’ve used is quoted in my first post. I haven’t copied over the full template and just points 1,2 and 3. Is the wording too much? Shall I reduce it? What shall I keep in / remove?

If it is just for the forum then you need to say so.  Moot point now as I see you have been given advice now by @Coupon-mad that includes removing extraneous points and saving them for the WS.  Paragraphs 1, 2 & 3 is the normal way to go.  Don't forget to add the rest of the defence template before you send it to the CCBC by e-mail

billymcdafthead

Coupon-mad said:

I'd remove all of this which is for the witness statement:

 2016 was an incredibly difficult year for both the Defendant and her husband. They had purchased a vehicle that kept breaking down, they had their first baby, they were informed of the death of her husband’s estranged father, her husband lost his Grandfather to Cancer whom he was very close to and then had a motorcycle accident himself, whereby he hit his head, suffering Concussion and Post Concussion syndrome, resulting in time off work and caused slight memory loss causing incredible strain to their relationship. Since his accident the defendant’s husband suffers with Anxiety and Depression but continues to balance a full time job to support his family.
·       The Defendant is an NHS worker and a full time mother and did not respond to the 2021 letters sent by DCBL legal due to not believing they were valid claims. The defendant continued to receive three further demands for £160 for a fine over five (5) years old from DCBL causing further stress and anxiety to an already busy work and home life.
·       On 27/08/2021 the defendant received a Letter of Claim from DCB Legal and at this point the defendant realised that this was a legitimate claim and began responding to DCB Legal and UKPC through SAR requests to obtain further details regarding the claim.
·       Although an Notice to keeper was apparently sent, none were ever received by the defendant and the first time she was made aware of the claim was on 01/04/2021. Any letters received have been kept since the 01/04/2021.
·       UKPC have been asked to provide evidence showing the alleged contravention, however have failed to show any significant evidence that shows the contravention of parking in “an unauthorised area”. Their documentary evidence is not dated and the pictures provided by UKPC are blurry and do not show the terms of parking as they were in 2016.
·       The defendant’s position is that they were parked at the location legitimately in connection with Halfords Autocentes.
·       DCB Legal has attempted to provide false evidence to the defendant via email in order to convince her to pay the fine. This is unacceptable behavior by any company and will be raised in the Witness Statement.
·       At point four (4) of the Particulars of Claim on the N1 form the Claimant has stated that the defendant had agreed to pay within 28 days, however no agreement was ever made and this is another example of DCB Legal’s wrongful claims. The defendant was not made aware of this claim until five (5) years after the alleged contravention.
·       The defendant is a law abiding citizen and has never had anything like this against her. She is currently studying at University part time whilst also juggling her part time NHS role and looking after her five (5) year old son. This claim has taken her away from her studies to focus on contesting this claim that is false and has caused her additional stress during an already stressful time in her life.
·       The defendant denies any wrongdoing and will be happy to provide the evidence mentioned above.

Just replace it with a couple of sentences denying that any terms were breached or that Halfords issued visitor permits.  Vehicles were de facto authorised if drivers were patrons of Halfords and there would have been no other reason for the D's husband to stop there because he had free parking at work...nearby (have I remembered that right?).

Any chance the vehicle was left with Halfords one day, who would have been the keeper that  day, and one of their employees could have parked it there?  Had you both thought about that?

That’s perfect. Thank you. I thought maybe we had over written at this stage. Ill reduce It down as suggested. It’s very likely Halfords parked the car there but they don’t have any record we can utilise for that day. There’s no other reason for us to park in this area other than use of Halfords (husband has the free parking as you said). Thanks again! Ill be back to update

Coupon-mad

You don't have to prove Halfords parked it there.  You can simply state that it was most likely that their employee did, and that Halfords was the keeper of the car that day whilst they worked on it, and the Claimant has been told this years ago(?)

The 'keeper' for the purposes of POFA 2012 Schedule 4 liability for the alleged breach of a driver, is only presumed to be the registered keeper at the first instance.  Where the 'keeper' was known to be, on the balance of probabilities, another party, the rk can no longer be presumed to be the 'keeper' on that material date and it should be Halfords who were pursued...

...IF YOU MADE IT CLEAR PRE-ACTION THAT HALFORDS HAD CONTROL OF THE CAR ON ALL OCCASIONS THAT IT WAS LEFT WITH THEM.

Did you make that clear before the claim was filed, that the car was left in the keeping of Halfords and neither of you parked it there?

In fact your defence should NOT be saying your husband parked it there if he didn't and a Halfords employee did.

billymcdafthead

Thanks for your response Coupon-mad. 

I haven't told them at any stage that Halfords was the keeper. Maybe I missed a trick there. I thought because we didn't have any proof of it - it would just be dismissed, but obviously we should have said that. I was hoping the SAR would prove that we at Halfords that day, but it didn't. 

I will change it then at the top of the defense statement. 

We only ever got the demand letters 5 years after the alleged contravention... we never got pre action stage from UKPC (but they claim they have sent us letters back in 2016). 

We have emailed Halfords with no response as of yet. 
I also complained to my local MP who is going to approach UKPC regarding the matter. 

billymcdafthead

Hi, just a bit of an update on this (as I’ve seen so many post that don’t update on the progress)…

1. Halfords still have not returned our contact
2. Our MP tried to speak to DCBL with no resolution being made. 
3. DCBL have reviewed our defence and wish to proceed to trial. 

Quick question:

I’ve read somewhere that there’s a 6 year window that these claims must be finalised? The ticket was issued in April 2016 and we near April 2022. Will we realistically get a hearing by April 2022? Can this claim go beyond April 2022 now it’s been registered with the Court? 

Thanks in advance

Umkomaas

If DCB Legal have issued a court claim, the 6 year limit no longer applies, they have issued proceedings within the prescribed timescale.