unpaid PCN, court hearing letter - case CLOSED

kokolino23

Hello,

PCN issued back in 2017

Unfortunately I've misread the advice and didn't appeal against the PCN in the first place

After more than 4 years and various letters, we now had another one that is taking us to court

If this is a genuine one, what can we do next, please?

Pay it and move on?

Many thanks

Umkomaas

You really want to pay it? 😳

I note that the Date of Issue shown on the Claim Form is 7 December 2021, so that bit of information is helpful to forum regular @KeithP to give you some target dates and early actions to get the ball rolling if you're going to defend yourself against the outrageous amount they are trying to gouge.

But you're also showing the Claim Reference Number which should not be shown on a public forum. I think you'll have enough posts and time on the forum to be able to edit the Claim Form and obliterate the number. 

In order to fully defend this, the entire process from Claim Form to hearing (should it get that far) is provided in full technicolour advice and guidance in the NEWBIES FAQ Announcement, second post.  Please read and follow all the steps as the process moves forward. 

kokolino23

Umkomaas said:

You really want to pay it? 😳

I note that the Date of Issue shown on the Claim Form is 7 December 2021, so that bit of information is helpful to forum regular @KeithP to give you some target dates and early actions to get the ball rolling if you're going to defend yourself against the outrageous amount they are trying to gouge.

But you're also showing the Claim Reference Number which should not be shown on a public forum. I think you'll have enough posts and time on the forum to be able to edit the Claim Form and obliterate the number. 

In order to fully defend this, the entire process from Claim Form to hearing (should it get that far) is provided in full technicolour advice and guidance in the NEWBIES FAQ Announcement, second post.  Please read and follow all the steps as the process moves forward. 

Thanks for pointing that out, Claim Form now edited.

Of course I don't like to pay, otherwise I wouldn't seek advice here.

They're laying saying that "the driver agreed to pay within 28 days but did not". First of all, I wasn't the driver (my wife was), secondly, I didn't agree to pay it at all. Unless not making an appeal in 14 days is considered as consent.

D_P_Dance

They have added what appears to be a considerable extra unlawful amount for debt collection. This amounts to double recovery and Judges all over the country are dismissing these spurious additions. Indeed some judges have dismissed entire claims because of this. Read this and complain to Trading Standards and 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/

Have you seen C5 programme yesteray at 7PM.  ?

KeithP

kokolino23 said:

Umkomaas said:

You really want to pay it? 😳

I note that the Date of Issue shown on the Claim Form is 7 December 2021, so that bit of information is helpful to forum regular @KeithP to give you some target dates and early actions to get the ball rolling if you're going to defend yourself against the outrageous amount they are trying to gouge.

But you're also showing the Claim Reference Number which should not be shown on a public forum. I think you'll have enough posts and time on the forum to be able to edit the Claim Form and obliterate the number. 

In order to fully defend this, the entire process from Claim Form to hearing (should it get that far) is provided in full technicolour advice and guidance in the NEWBIES FAQ Announcement, second post.  Please read and follow all the steps as the process moves forward. 

They're laying saying that "the driver agreed to pay within 28 days but did not". First of all, I wasn't the driver (my wife was), secondly, I didn't agree to pay it at all. Unless not making an appeal in 14 days is considered as consent.

The allegation is that by parking the driver agreed to the terms of the contract.

Those contract terms are the terms on the signs.

Almost certainly there is a term on the signs stating something like "if the driver doesn't park in accordance with the rules then he agrees to pay £nn within 28 days...".

kokolino23

D_P_Dance said:

They have added what appears to be a considerable extra unlawful amount for debt collection. This amounts to double recovery and Judges all over the country are dismissing these spurious additions. Indeed some judges have dismissed entire claims because of this. Read this and complain to Trading Standards and 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/

Have you seen C5 programme yesteray at 7PM.  ?

Unfortunately I didn't see that programme yesterday.

Le_Kirk

kokolino23 said:

Umkomaas said:

In order to fully defend this, the entire process from Claim Form to hearing (should it get that far) is provided in full technicolour advice and guidance in the NEWBIES FAQ Announcement, second post.  Please read and follow all the steps as the process moves forward. 

Thanks for pointing that out, Claim Form now edited.

Of course I don't like to pay, otherwise I wouldn't seek advice here.

They're laying saying that "the driver agreed to pay within 28 days but did not". First of all, I wasn't the driver (my wife was), secondly, I didn't agree to pay it at all. Unless not making an appeal in 14 days is considered as consent.

Well done on removing your claim number.  The plain fact is you did agree (well the driver did) to pay it, as it is on the signs in the car park which form your contract.  Just follow the advice given by @Umkomaas and start compiling your defence.  Do you still have the original PCN?  Can you check if it is POFA compliant?  If it is not then do not identify the driver, as a keeper cannot be held liable for the actions of a driver on a non-compliant PCN.

kokolino23

KeithP said:

kokolino23 said:

Umkomaas said:

You really want to pay it? 😳

I note that the Date of Issue shown on the Claim Form is 7 December 2021, so that bit of information is helpful to forum regular @KeithP to give you some target dates and early actions to get the ball rolling if you're going to defend yourself against the outrageous amount they are trying to gouge.

But you're also showing the Claim Reference Number which should not be shown on a public forum. I think you'll have enough posts and time on the forum to be able to edit the Claim Form and obliterate the number. 

In order to fully defend this, the entire process from Claim Form to hearing (should it get that far) is provided in full technicolour advice and guidance in the NEWBIES FAQ Announcement, second post.  Please read and follow all the steps as the process moves forward. 

They're laying saying that "the driver agreed to pay within 28 days but did not". First of all, I wasn't the driver (my wife was), secondly, I didn't agree to pay it at all. Unless not making an appeal in 14 days is considered as consent.

The allegation is that by parking the driver agreed to the terms of the contract.

Those contract terms are the terms on the signs.

Almost certainly there is a term on the signs stating something like "if the driver doesn't park in accordance with the rules then he agrees to pay £nn within 28 days...".

Fair enough, I thought that would be the case.

What shuld I do next then?

Have a look here

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4816822/newbies-private-parking-ticket-old-or-new-read-these-faqs-first-thankyou#latest

and follow the steps kindly mentioned on post 2?

Many thanks

KeithP

With a Claim Issue Date of 7th December, you have until Wednesday 29th December to file an Acknowledgment of Service. Do not file an AoS before 11th December, but otherwise 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 Monday 9th January 2022 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 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'.

kokolino23

Le_Kirk said:

kokolino23 said:

Umkomaas said:

In order to fully defend this, the entire process from Claim Form to hearing (should it get that far) is provided in full technicolour advice and guidance in the NEWBIES FAQ Announcement, second post.  Please read and follow all the steps as the process moves forward. 

Thanks for pointing that out, Claim Form now edited.

Of course I don't like to pay, otherwise I wouldn't seek advice here.

They're laying saying that "the driver agreed to pay within 28 days but did not". First of all, I wasn't the driver (my wife was), secondly, I didn't agree to pay it at all. Unless not making an appeal in 14 days is considered as consent.

Well done on removing your claim number.  The plain fact is you did agree (well the driver did) to pay it, as it is on the signs in the car park which form your contract.  Just follow the advice given by @Umkomaas and start compiling your defence.  Do you still have the original PCN?  Can you check if it is POFA compliant?  If it is not then do not identify the driver, as a keeper cannot be held liable for the actions of a driver on a non-compliant PCN.

Unfortunately I can't find the original PCN, was issued on 06/2017. Would be fun asking them to provide it. I can also say that I did appeal through the email but they didn't bother to reply ?! Not sure if that counts though.

KeithP

kokolino23 said:

D_P_Dance said:

They have added what appears to be a considerable extra unlawful amount for debt collection. This amounts to double recovery and Judges all over the country are dismissing these spurious additions. Indeed some judges have dismissed entire claims because of this. Read this and complain to Trading Standards and 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/

Have you seen C5 programme yesteray at 7PM.  ?

Unfortunately I didn't see that programme yesterday.

Feel free to watch it when you like - until 30 April 2024...
www.channel5.com/show/parking-the-big-con/season-1/parking-the-big-con

Click on  sit back... enjoy.