UKPC court case from a 2016 PCN

Quantum65

Thanks so much for the advice. I will screenshot the images expired and I have pushed into para 5 as follows: 

2.  It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question, but driver is unknown due to multiple drivers and liability is denied. 

3.  It is disputed that any of the Claimant’s paper notices complied with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA). Nowhere on the received notices does it specify the period of parking, this information is left out for all PCNs, which contradicts Sch. 4 Paragraph 7 2a, the paper notices must specify the period of parking to which the notice relates. It is disputed that any of the Claimant’s Notices to Keeper (NTK) complied with POFA. Nowhere on the received notices does it specify the period of parking, this information is left out for all PCNs, which contradicts Sch. 4 Paragraph 8 2a, the NTK must specify the period of parking to which the notice relates.

4.  The date of the alleged event falls on the week after final exams would have been completed at Brunel University, the landowner, therefore it is likely that the driver was loading a student’s belongings who was moving out of campus accommodation. There is a security barrier at the entrance of the car park where you must state your intention before entering; on moving out security will usually verbally agree a grace period to allow a short time to load your vehicle and pick up a student. The Claimants’ PCN did not provide evidence of an overstay beyond this grace period and only provides a single image of the vehicle.

5.  The Defendant also believes that the Claimant's signage does not cover loading/unloading so there can have been no breach of a 'relevant contract or relevant obligation' (POFA 2012 pre-requisites).  In fact, drivers picking up students at the end of terms were entitled to rely on the alternative verbal contract offered by security staff who let the cars in.

Is this defence starting to look like what's required now?

Coupon-mad

Yes, that's good.

1505grandad

A heads-up:-   (perhaps the experts can confirm that this is appropriate as there recently seem to be several "more than 2 and 3 paras" Defences.

Hopefully you have read and understood the Template Defence and therefore realise that the existing para 7  in the Template states -  "He was not taken by either party to Somerfield in point #5 above and in any event it is worth noting that the lead Southampton case of Britannia v Crosby was not appealed."

As you now have more than paras 2 and 3 - and therefore have to renumber the subsequent paras - you have altered the reference to point 5 accordingly.

Le_Kirk

1505grandad said:

A heads-up:-   (perhaps the experts can confirm that this is appropriate as there recently seem to be several "more than 2 and 3 paras" Defences.

Hopefully you have read and understood the Template Defence and therefore realise that the existing para 7  in the Template states -  "He was not taken by either party to Somerfield in point #5 above and in any event it is worth noting that the lead Southampton case of Britannia v Crosby was not appealed."

As you now have more than paras 2 and 3 - and therefore have to renumber the subsequent paras - you have altered the reference to point 5 accordingly.

@1505grandad is correct, therefore in your case @Quantum65 you need to modify paragraph 7 (which will be 9 in the new defence) as you have added two paragraphs and you should refer to point 7 not point 5.

Quantum65

That is an amazing spot, thank you so much both! I have made the relevant changes.

Quantum65

And big thank you to Coupon-mad and everyone else for the great advice!

Le_Kirk

Quantum65 said:

That is an amazing spot, thank you so much both! I have made the relevant changes.

All credit to @1505grandad

Quantum65

Hi team,

I've got the N180 copy from DCB Legal but I haven't got any directions from the court yet. Would I be fine to just download a copy of the form and email it to the court and DCB Legal now, even before the court asks me to directly?

DCB Legal have confirmed that they already sent it to the court.

Redx

Quantum65 said:

Hi team,

I've got the N180 copy from DCB Legal but I haven't got any directions from the court yet. Would I be fine to just download a copy of the form and email it to the court and DCB Legal now, even before the court asks me to directly?

DCB Legal have confirmed that they already sent it to the court.

No , plus there is no allocated court yet

Yes you can download the N180 and fill it in and save it

Do not email to the CCBC and dcb legal until your claim history shows it's been posted , because you would be jumping the gun , the CCBC haven't got that far yet , so have more patience , wait , keep checking MCOL claim history

Quantum65

Hi team,

Sorry if this is just me being overly anxious. 

I got the N180 request from the court and then sent it via email to CCBC AQ and DCB Legal on Feb 15th. I got the acknowledgment email from the CCBC auto-responder. As of today, MCOL hasn't been updated to reflect that I've submitted the N180. 

My deadline is Feb 28th, and while I do have the auto-responder acknowledgment, should I do any chasing as the deadline approaches if MCOL doesn't reflect my filed N180 soon?

Thanks