County Court Business Centre Claim Form - Here we go again!

heroicsatsuma1

Hi,

Was hoping for a little guidance on how to put together a defence against TPS & BW Legal - who seem to just want to waste people's time and cause stress for nothing - money grabbers!

Anyway, I received this PCN back in April 2019 which alleges that my vehicle overstayed in a free car park for 18 minutes. 

Also, on the paperwork it quite clearly states 'Liability for this PCN lies with the driver of the vehicle'.  I have had numerous letters both from both the aforementioned and finally received a second 'Letter of Claim', which they have now acted on.  The first letter of claim was sent in September 2019, I then sent a SAR to TPS and I can find no notice to keeper in the paperwork they sent.

Am I correct in thinking a notice to keeper is a requirement for the enforcement of a PCN?  If so, I understand that I first need to acknowledge their claim via the government's online portal - then get together a defence.

Many thanks in advance for your help.

Redx

Read the fifth post and second post of the newbies FAQ sticky thread near the top of the forum in announcements , the details are there , plus read the First post in the defence template post by coupon mad in announcements , too

Post the issue date from the claim form below

Coupon-mad

The PCN is the NTK.

And yep, we need the Claim date of issue, please.

heroicsatsuma1

Thank reading up now - issue date is 26/11/2021

D_P_Dance

If they say that only the driver is liable advice them to send it to the driver.  Do not tell them who that person was. 

If they commence court action where POFA does not apply warn  them that you will seek costs under CPR27.14(2)(g)  for unreasonable behaviour.  Also complain to your MP.  

Coupon-mad

Too late for that DP.  They have a claim.

heroicsatsuma1

Thought the tactic was to not engage with these people.  Plus thought I was in good standing as didn't receive a NTK, but now I find out that the PCN is a NTK! Guess I'll have to argue that £40/ then £70/ then £90 for 18 minutes additional parking seems a bit excessive. 

heroicsatsuma1

Supposed to be a free car park for the shops there - if they wanted payment just put some ticket/barrier system up - so underhanded.

D_P_Dance

heroicsatsuma1 said:

Thought ... guess I'll have to argue that £40/ then £70/ then £90 for 18 minutes additional parking seems a bit excessive. 

The Supreme Court riuled in the case of Beavis v Parking Eye that such amounts were not excessive so your argument would fail.  

heroicsatsuma1

So not a leg to stand on then PCN sent on time, all the details look to be there pictured on some road with ANPR.  Had no idea that it was even a controlled car park down there at Purley Way Retail Park - guess they don't want people spending money in their shops - no wonder Amazon is wiping them all out.

bargepole

D_P_Dance said:

The Supreme Court riuled in the case of Beavis v UKPC that such amounts were not excessive so your argument would fail.  

You mean Parking Eye v Beavis. UKPC were never involved.