UKPC County Court Claim Form - Defence

Hooper546

Hi, 

I have received a County Court Business Centre Claim Form from UKPC, after 5 years of harassment. I have read the processes, I'm just looking for some help with the deadlines and defence wording. 

Issue date: 24/11/21

AOS Submitted: 08/12/21

The tickets were received in 2016 at the car park of my partner's flat. He lived there with his sister who had main use of their only assigned parking space due to being a shift worker and therefore not always being able to adhere to the parking restrictions on the nearby roads. This meant we sometimes had to use one of the unassigned spaces in the main entrance of the car park, which we knew were not assigned to anyone and were not being used by contractors at that point (the flats were brand new and these spaces had not been bollarded off for contractor use, as they now have been). 

Generally, I would just park on the nearby roads, adhering to the parking restrictions which were enforced due to being right by a train station. However, there were occasions where I would have his dad with me, who had recently lost his sight and was suffering with debilitating health issues. On these occasions, it was essential that I could alight and board him safely and within as little distance as possible. This is when I had to use the unassigned spaces which I received tickets for. 

When I researched the parking company who had issued tickets, everywhere I read was saying to ignore it and that it was not enforceable. With no other clear option for parking locations, I had to continue using the space and ignoring the tickets but in the end the situation became far too distressing, with regular letters being sent from UKPC and debt collectors. I eventually managed to find a neighbour of the flats who kindly let me use their driveway instead, which meant we didn't have to cross the main roads.

As I mentioned above, I had submitted an AOS and sent a SARS to the company, which I have had a response from. Any assistance with writing my defence now would be hugely appreciated. 

Thanks so much in advance. 

D_P_Dance

Read thes and complain to yout MP,

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2016/11/residential-parking.html

https://forums.landlordzone.co.uk/forum/residential-letting-questions/1053920-private-parking-companies

KeithP

Hooper546 said:

I have received a County Court Business Centre Claim Form...

Issue date: 24/11/21

AOS Submitted: 08/12/21

Hello and welcome.

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 a little over a week 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'.

Fruitcake

I don't know where you got your previous information from, but the advice to ignore a PCN has not been given on this forum since the law changed in 2012.

What happened when you complained to the landowner?

You should follow the guide to court written by bargepole that you will find in the second post of the NEWBIES.
Use the template defence in the sticky Announcements and amend paragraphs 2 and 3 to suit your case. Only post those two paragraphs for the regulars to check over.

You need to get a copy of the lease/AST in place at the time of the alleged event as that will have primacy of contract over anything an unregulated private company has to say.
What the property rental agreement doesn't say is just as important.

patient_dream

I assume the legal is DCBL ?????   well it would be ... they take on dodgy old claims from UKPC

Does not mean they will win, far from it.  DCBL recently went into a major car crash with another PPC called VCS.   That was a really big dodgy claim from DCBL that cost VCS £1000

READ ALL ABOUT THIS BUNCH ....
DCBL letters ... forum group thread
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6237177/dcbl-letters-forum-group-thread#latest

Hooper546

Hi Everyone, 

Thanks so much for your responses so far. I've amended the suggested defence template to fit my personal defence and would really appreciate some proof reading and possibly suggestions of any further points to include/discrepancies to look out for. 

------------

3. The particulars state 'The Defendant is liable as the driver or keeper' which indicates that the Claimant has failed to identify a Cause of Action, and is simply offering a menu of choices. As such, the Claim fails to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4, or with Civil Practice Direction 16, paras. 7.3 to 7.5.

4. The Defendant avers that they were, on most or all occasions, likely to have been merely assisting relatives to board or alight because they were blind and had major double organ transplant surgery affecting their physical and mental health. This means they met the definition of disability and they and their carers (both protected by the Equality Act 2010) were entitled to the reasonable adjustment of setting down a disabled person including assisted boarding/alighting to/from the flat. As their carer, transporting them around, it is eminently reasonable for the Defendant to expect time to pick up or set down a disabled person, just as a taxi driver would, without penalty.

5. It is the Defendant's position that this amounts to serial predatory ticketing of residents and their visitors/carers. The Claimant is put to strict proof of each parking event in terms of allowing a fair consideration period and should provide a witness statement from that person (ticket administrator).

6. There is no evidence of the vehicle being left parked and, whilst the Defendant recalls that they did go indoors, it is too long ago to be sure which claimed events may have been parking, as opposed to setting down of the Claimant's disabled relative.

7. Within the appeal case of Jopson vs Homeguard - (case no. 9GF0A9E Judge HARRIS) Para 21 - it states the definition of whether a car is parked or loading/unloading which applies to the defendants case.

‘Whether a car is parked, or simply stopped, or left for a moment while unloading, or (to take an example discussed in argument) accompanying a frail person inside, must be a question of fact or degree.’

‘I am quite satisfied, and I find as a fact, that while the appellant’s car had been stationary for more than a minute and without its driver for the same period (whatever precisely it was), while she carried it in her desk, it was not “parked”. Accordingly, for that reason too, the appellant was not liable to the charge stipulated in the respondent’s notice.’

-----------


One thing I wanted to flag up as well was when I emailed the DPO with a SARS, they got back to me with a total of 25 PCNs stating 'Please note there are 25 parking charge notices against you, 23 in Legal Action and 2 with Debt Recovery.'

There are only 17 on this particular claim so I'm wondering if this means the rest are now void or if I'm going to have to go through this process all over again? 

Hooper546

Fruitcake said:

I don't know where you got your previous information from, but the advice to ignore a PCN has not been given on this forum since the law changed in 2012.

What happened when you complained to the landowner?

You should follow the guide to court written by bargepole that you will find in the second post of the NEWBIES.
Use the template defence in the sticky Announcements and amend paragraphs 2 and 3 to suit your case. Only post those two paragraphs for the regulars to check over.

You need to get a copy of the lease/AST in place at the time of the alleged event as that will have primacy of contract over anything an unregulated private company has to say.
What the property rental agreement doesn't say is just as important.

Unfortunately the landowner has been uncooperative and I've been passed between many different people without actually making any progress. I'm still actively pursuing getting a copy of the lease for the hearing though. 

Coupon-mad

The rest will follow with a new claim or two, in order to intimidate you and catch you out latee.  Or because they are incompetent.  It's one or the other, or quite possibly both.

But you can repeat the same defence then, AND will be able to add the usual Henderson v Henderson/ cause of action estoppel argument (search the forum when needed).

You should delete #3 (adds nothing and makes no sense as you are admitting to driving) and change the numbering below.  

In #2 of the template, we assume you put 'registered keeper and driver'?

Hooper546

Okay, I'll look forward to that then...

I did say 'registered keeper and driver' in #2 yes, I'll remove #3 and adjust the numbering accordingly. 

Should I mention anything about the costs added on e.g. 8% interest, court fee etc. or is that not worth highlighting? 


Can I also just clarify the last point on the guide to submitting your defence:

"You want a hearing and you can claim your costs if you win, and you risk nothing (no CCJ, no huge costs) by defending, because if you were among the handful who report a loss here you'd have 30 days to pay and it would be less than on the claim form (£175 - £200 total)." 

Does that only apply to 1 parking charge? Just want to clarify what the £175 - £200 covers. 

Redx

spurious costs are already in the template defence

yes, that figure is typical of a one PCN court claim, not multiple PCNs

Hooper546

So with the specified point removed, does the below sound good to submit?

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

3. The Defendant avers that they were, on most or all occasions, likely to have been merely assisting relatives to board or alight because they were blind and had major double organ transplant surgery affecting their physical and mental health. This means they met the definition of disability and they and their carers (both protected by the Equality Act 2010) were entitled to the reasonable adjustment of setting down a disabled person including assisted boarding/alighting to/from the flat. As their carer, transporting them around, it is eminently reasonable for the Defendant to expect time to pick up or set down a disabled person, just as a taxi driver would, without penalty.

4. It is the Defendant's position that this amounts to serial predatory ticketing of residents and their visitors/carers. The Claimant is put to strict proof of each parking event in terms of allowing a fair consideration period and should provide a witness statement from that person (ticket administrator).

5. There is no evidence of the vehicle being left parked and, whilst the Defendant recalls that they did go indoors, it is too long ago to be sure which claimed events may have been parking, as opposed to setting down of the Claimant's disabled relative.

6. Within the appeal case of Jopson vs Homeguard - (case no. 9GF0A9E Judge HARRIS) Para 21 - it states the definition of whether a car is parked or loading/unloading which applies to the defendants case.

‘Whether a car is parked, or simply stopped, or left for a moment while unloading, or (to take an example discussed in argument) accompanying a frail person inside, must be a question of fact or degree.’

‘I am quite satisfied, and I find as a fact, that while the appellant’s car had been stationary for more than a minute and without its driver for the same period (whatever precisely it was), while she carried it in her desk, it was not “parked”. Accordingly, for that reason too, the appellant was not liable to the charge stipulated in the respondent’s notice.’