UKPC County Court Claim Form - Defence

Coupon-mad

You said that #2 said 'keeper and driver'.

The court fees and 8% interest are normal and not false.

Was a windscreen PCN affixed each time or did they take covert distance photos and then issue PCNs in bulk, weeks later out of the blue and in cowardly fashion by post?  If so, say so because that means the residents and Defendant had no idea they were being the subject of surveillance, which breaches the Claimant's code of practice.

Also add in that there was no fair grace period allowed on any occasion.

1505grandad

A heads-up:-

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 para 5 accordingly.

Le_Kirk

I would adjust paragraph 5 as you seem to be saying that "sometimes you parked"!

Hooper546

Thanks for the heads up on that, I've had another read through to ensure the paragraph numbers and references all match up. I have also adjusted paragraph 5 (in bold for feedback):

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 as opposed to being left temporarily to allow for the 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.’

Hooper546

Just to confirm, does the above seem okay to submit now?

Coupon-mad

Looks good to go.

Hooper546

Great, thanks so much for you help.