County Court Business Centre

shamrock83

Hi

Hope everyone is well. I am reading the newbie sections as much as possible but any advice that could be sent my way so I stay on track would be much appreciated regarding a PCN which I'm going to defend. I received a letter off DCBLegal in July 2021. It was a letter before claim in regards to a PCN as vehicle was parked in MOTO Scotch Corner for too long. I believe I overstayed by about two hours. This occurred in January 2017. I ignored the letter thinking it is a scam due to the amount of time. It was demanding £170. I had changed address twice and changed car since January 2017.

I received a claim form from CCBC with an issue date of 25/11/21. The sum has increased to £240.08 + £50 court fee + legal representatives costs £50= £325.08.

Today I am going to log on and moneyclaim.gov to acknowledge and defend. I'm also going to email the dpo at Groupnexus for a SAR. Should I also email DCBLegal as well for a SAR?

KeithP

shamrock83 said:

I received a claim form from CCBC with an issue date of 25/11/21.

Today I am going to log on and moneyclaim.gov to acknowledge and defend.

Hello and welcome.

With a Claim Issue Date of 25th November, you have until Tuesday 14th December to file an Acknowledgment of Service but there is nothing to be gained by delaying it. 

To file an AoS, follow the guidance in the Dropbox file linked from the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Having filed an AoS in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Wednesday 29th December 2021 to file your Defence.

That's over three 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 again at the second post on the NEWBIES thread - immediately following where you found the Acknowledgment of Service instructions.

Don't miss the deadline for filing an Acknowledgment of Service, nor that 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'.

shamrock83 said:

Today I am going to log on and moneyclaim.gov to acknowledge and defend.

As described above, by all means file an Acknowledgment of Service today, but please take a little longer before filing a Defence.

shamrock83 said:

I'm also going to email the dpo at Groupnexus for a SAR. Should I also email DCBLegal as well for a SAR?

Yes, send a SAR to Groupnexus, but there's no point in sending one to DCBLegal.

Le_Kirk

Cannot emphasise strongly enough the advice posted by @KeithP, do not put anything in the defence box on MCOL not even a full stop as that will be taken as your defence.  Follow the guidance as advised.

D_P_Dance

 The sum has increased to £240.08 + £50 court fee + legal representatives costs £50= £325.08.

They have added what appears to be an extra unlawful amount for debt collection. This amounts to double recovery and some 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

However, a VCS appealed this so it may not apply in all cases, read this

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ntksx9g7177ahyg/VCS v Percy v1 Amendments (2).pdf?dl=0Also read this

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

Also consider complaining to The SRA about the solicitor, if one is involved They are fully aware of the unlawful nature of most of thse additions yet persist in adding them..

https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/problems/

Coupon-mad

Are you saying the car was there four hours?  Long time, how come?

shamrock83

Hi, Thanks for the info above and hope everyone has had an enjoyable Christmas. I have sent a complaint to my MP and also sent a complaint to SRA. The total amount of time I spent at MOTO Scotch corner was 2hours 54 minutes. I was working in the area and had some time between jobs and was killing time. I didn't realise that there were parking charges like this and didn't notice any signs. I do have a physical receipt from Burger King which I found on my tax return. Might be the most expensive burger I've had.

In the Particulars of the claim, it does refer to 'damages' that the claimant has suffered and also interest being added which is why the amount has increased. The template I was going to use for my defence is a post from coupon-mad on 26/2/2020 titled 'Suggested template defence to adapt for all parking charge cases where they add false admin costs'. Can I still use this template even though the particular of claim refer to 'Damages' and 'Interest' instead of 'Admin costs'?

I have copied the template, the text I've entered into Section 3 is:   "I don't  recall receiving any letters in the post from the claimant. In July 2021, I received a letter from DCBLegal, I ignored it as I believed it to be a scam letter due to the excessive amounts being claimed and no recollection of the event. The alleged offence occurred on 9/1/2017. The date in question is unremarkable and I therefore have no recollection of the circumstances surrounding these events. I felt vindicated in that decision when I received no further letters or contact of any kind from the claimant or legal representative on this matter. I was then surprised to receive a claim form from the County Court Business Centre. I did some research into why I may have received this and it seems the claimant and similar parking companies are submitting masses of court claims for old “parking charges” and are inappropriately using the court system as a form of debt collection. I have never been issued with any evidence to show the car was parked on the grounds on the date. I visited Groupnexus website and entered the PCN. The PCN details have two photograph sections which apparently show the arrival and the departure of the vehicle in question. These images don't show any vehicle but have text which says 'picture temporarily unavailable'. According to the Groupnexus website, the PCN has been referred to a company called Debt Recovery Plus. I have not had any contact from this company either and am confused as to why this company is not mentioned in any correspondence from DCBLegal. The time of entry into MOTO Scotch Corner according to the Groupnexus website is 16:54 on 9/1/2017. This would have been very dark and I dispute the claimants claim that signs are prominently displayed. I visited the carpark on 23/12/2021 and there is evidence that lighting above signs does not work, the largest sign cannot be accessed safely via footpath and cannot see the text from the carpark. I have taken photos. The text on all signs is very small and varying sizes. Some signs show large sections of shading which make it impossible to read correctly. There is evidence that signs are damaged and I cannot clearly read the text. I am also confused by the different costs I am receiving. On the Groupnexus website, the PCN Total Payable is £140. The letter received off DCB Legal dated 26/7/2021 is asking for £170. . The signs displayed in the car park say £100 if you fail to pay. I requested a Subject Access Request from Groupnexus on 7/12/2021 as I have not received any evidence of the alleged offence but have not received any data at present". 

Does the above look okay or should I be adding some of the information into other sections of the defence? Such as the details of my photographs at Scotch Corner to section 13 of the template? Should I change Groupnexus to Claimant?

I am going to add in the Excel vs Wilkinson case to the template as well.

I haven't received the SAR from Groupnexus yet. Its still within 30 days of the request and I have to submit my defence 29/12/2021 probably wont receive it in time. I have taken photos of various signs in the carpark on the 23/12/2021. The photos do show shading, lights above signage not working, small text, damaged signs. Obviously this is nearly five years ago since the incident and the signs may have changed. Can I still use this as evidence?

Sorry if the questions seem irrelevant or not important, I'm just trying to make sure I don't mess this up. 

Kind regards

Redx

The above proposal for paragraph 3 is a witness statement , not a defence !!

The words , My Me Myself and I are not used in a defence , read a dozen recent defences for Highview Parking and C P Plus to see what they wrote for their adapted paragraphs , nothing like yours when you see them. Short and concise is required , with legal points , not explanations

It's , the claimant , the defendant , throughout , no names

Do not change any other paragraphs in the defence

No evidence is sent with the text only defence

A complaint to Moto got this one discontinued

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6262198/6-year-old-parking-ticket-county-court-claim/p1

Coupon-mad

Read other MOTO defences. Shedloads to copy from.

shamrock83

Hi Thanks for the feedback. I have emailed CEO of MOTO and also sent a complaint through their feedback form. I have amended the defence which was copied from other MOTO defences. Please see below:

 2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle and registered driver in question but liability is denied. 

3.  The location that the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) was issued was MOTO Service Station Scotch Corner.  The Defendant had undertaken a long day of work and was extremely tired and did not feel safe to continue driving. The Defendant took the decision to use the parking area of the Services to eat and sleep for a short time until they felt safe to continue the journey home. 

4. The Defendant was following Government advice not to drive if you feel tired and was aware of the danger of driving whilst tired and the possibility of causing harm to other drivers.  They were not aware how long they had slept for.

5.When the Defendant left the car park they did not see any signs that clearly stated any time limit to parking and they would not have expected to have been restricted in how long they were able to rest until they felt safe to drive.

6.The Defendant has found the bullying and intimidating tactics employed by the Claimant have caused stress and unnecessary worry. 

7.There are no terms and conditions signs at the front of the car park. There are however very small terms and condition signs within the car park to which are of very small font. It is also noted that there are numerous trees within the car park and poor lighting resulting in car park related signage being easily obscured.

8. The defendant has not received any correspondence from the claimant.

Coupon-mad

 and registered driver 

No such thing.

 The defendant has not received any correspondence from the claimant.

You did, the Letter before Claim (that you should have responded to) and then the claim form.  And I question, is this relevant to a defence, if the issue was caused by your logbook not being updated, which isn't the Claimant's fault?

shamrock83

Sorry registered driver was a typo. I will delete registered. With the letter, I meant from CP Plus direct not their solicitors but will delete that point. Thanks for the help