Highview Parking/DCB Legal County Court Claim

MissUltraViolet

Recieved a county claim form Friday and I am hoping I can get some advice in regards to defending it. I have spent a few days trying to read and learn as much as possible but it is all a bit overwhelming.

Issue date - 3rd March 2022.
Claimant - Highview Parking Limited
Address - DCB Legal Ltd.

Amount claimed - £245.52. Court Fee - £35, Legal represtatives costs £50.
Total is £330.52

1. The defendant (D) is indebted to the claimant (C) for parking charges issued to vehicle (XXXXXX) at the Broad Centre.
2. The PCN details are 01/12/2016
3. The PCN was issued on private land owned or managed by C. The vehicle was parked in breach of the terms on Cs signs (the contract) thus incurring the PCN.
4. The driver agreed to pay within 28 days but did not. D is liable as the driver or keeper. Despite requests the PCN is outstanding.
The contract entitles C to damages and the claimant claims -
1. £170 being the total of the PCN and damages.
2. Interest to the rate of 8% per annum persuant to s.69 of the county courts act 1984 from the date hereof at a daily rate of £0.02 until judgement or sooner payment.
3. Costs and court fees.

___________

So far I have - 

Sent a SAR request to Highview Parking.

Used the guides to do the AOS this morning (8th March, on day 5 of the issue date.Hopefully that was correct) 

I checked the PCN info on the Group Nexus site, while waiting for the SAR response, and from what I can gather so far it relates to an incident where I drove into the car park thinking there would be a certain amount of free time for retail customers. (Not an excuse but every other retail park in the area offers at least the first 30 mins free!) There is one large sign at the entrance saying it is a private car park and to view the parking terms and conditions on other signs. You cannot view these terms and conditions without entering and theres nowhere to stop outside the car park beforehand to walk in and check. We entered the car park and proceeded to follow its one way system looking for any payment meters or signs. The signs, of course, have ridiculously tiny writing on them and are high up on poles sat inbetween two rows of parked cars so impossible to read from within a car. My partner got out the car to go and check them. This happened in December so car park was very busy with numerous shops and a supermarket on it so I had cars behind me and in front and people everywhere. I was holding up traffic so made my way around the one way system until my partner had finished checking the signs and made their way back out to the road. He got back in the car and stated there was no free time limit at all. We had no change on us so I drove back around again and we left. The amount of traffic, people pulling in and out of spaces and pedestrians plus the car park exits out onto a very busy road which creates a backlog of people trying to exit means, according to their ANPR, we were in the car park for 17 minutes but we did at no point park or pull into a bay. My partner is also happy to act as a witness if that is possible and would help.

Is that even a usable defence? It was so long ago the only reason I can remember anything from a random day in 2016 is because it was the only time we have ever been there!

I guess my question at this point is, is this worth fighting? What are my chances of getting the amount at least lowered?

Thanks! 

D_P_Dance

1. £170 being the total of the PCN and damages.

They have added what appears to be an 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 Excel v Wilkinson.pdf?dl=0

However, 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 this,

"Abuse of process – the quantum

13. In addition to the disputed Parking Charge Notice claim amount of £100, the Claimant has added a sum of £60 that is disingenuously described variously as 'debt collection costs', ‘additional charges levied to cover the cost of recovery’, ‘additional administration costs’, ‘debt recovery costs’, ‘initial legal costs’ and ‘recovery costs’. The added £60 constitutes double recovery and the court is invited to find the quantum claimed is false and an abuse of process as was found by District Judge Claire Jackson (now HHJ Jackson, a Specialist Civil Circuit Judge) in Excel vs Wilkinson: G4QZ465V, a similar case in which £60 had been added to a parking charge, heard in July 2020 (the transcript of which is exhibit XX-04). The Judge concluded that such claims are proceedings with 'an improper collateral purpose'. Leave to appeal was refused and that route was not pursued."

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/

2. Interest to the rate of 8% per annum 

Wi,shful thinking.  If they won, which is unlikely, they would be very lucky to get 3%

Alanthebear

I won a very similar case just yesterday, car in car park for 12 minutes. Someone more knowledgeable will come along soon but If you follow all the instructions in the newbie thread you stand a very good chance of winning, particularly with the new government rules coming out.

Good luck.

Trainerman

Last point first - Very good chance of getting it lowered as they will have added an extra £70 for whichever reason they made up at the time .... admin, debt collecting, washing the cat. The new Government guidelines bans that AND there is plenty of supporting caselaw.

Secondly, looking for a space is not parking, thirdly if you went through the car park twice then you have probably been 'double dipped', fourthly the signs are poor and confusing etc etc etc .

Have a good walk through the Newbies. Plenty you can do

D_P_Dance

looking for a space is not parking, 

Indeed, read this

https://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2014/03/waiting-for-space-is-not-parking.html

MissUltraViolet

Thank you all for the replies, I am feeling a little more confident now. I will spend the next few days reading more and saving all the helpful information before I begin to draft the defence!

KeithP

MissUltraViolet said:

Recieved a county claim form...

Issue date - 3rd March 2022.

So far I have - 

Used the guides to do the AOS this morning (8th March, on day 5 of the issue date. Hopefully that was correct) 

With a Claim Issue Date of 3rd March, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Tuesday 5th April 2022 to file your Defence.

That's 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 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'.

MissUltraViolet

Quick question - I emailed the SAR request to Nexus at 4pm (in case the time is relevant for some reason!) on the 4th March. I got the expected response, them asking me to fill in their silly form. I replied with a copy of the claim form and a utility bill and they replied today stating they had validated my request and will begin processing it and I will recieve the information within the 30 day limit giving them until the 6th April to get it to me.

Are they correct or should they be going by the date I emailed them instead of when they decided to validate my request, which would mean they need to provide the details to me by the 3rd April and not the 6th? I am sure I have read this somewhere!

I am just wondering whether arguing that point with them may be worth it if what they send in the SAR could be of any benefit to my defence, I would rather get it before I have to submit it.

KeithP

Not worth arguing about.
The response to a Subject Access Request will be far more useful at witness statement and evidence time.

Coupon-mad

Alanthebear said:

I won a very similar case just yesterday, car in car park for 12 minutes. Someone more knowledgeable will come along soon but If you follow all the instructions in the newbie thread you stand a very good chance of winning, particularly with the new government rules coming out.

Good luck.

So good to see more and more newbies staying here to help us advise people!  Welcome!

Le_Kirk

MissUltraViolet said:

I checked the PCN info on the Group Nexus site, while waiting for the SAR response, and from what I can gather so far it relates to an incident where I drove into the car park thinking there would be a certain amount of free time for retail customers. (Not an excuse but every other retail park in the area offers at least the first 30 mins free!) There is one large sign at the entrance saying it is a private car park and to view the parking terms and conditions on other signs. You cannot view these terms and conditions without entering and there's nowhere to stop outside the car park beforehand to walk in and check. We entered the car park and proceeded to follow its one way system looking for any payment meters or signs. The signs, of course, have ridiculously tiny writing on them and are high up on poles sat in between two rows of parked cars so impossible to read from within a car. My partner got out the car to go and check them. This happened in December so car park was very busy with numerous shops and a supermarket on it so I had cars behind me and in front and people everywhere. I was holding up traffic so made my way around the one way system until my partner had finished checking the signs and made their way back out to the road. He got back in the car and stated there was no free time limit at all. We had no change on us so I drove back around again and we left. The amount of traffic, people pulling in and out of spaces and pedestrians plus the car park exits out onto a very busy road which creates a backlog of people trying to exit means, according to their ANPR, we were in the car park for 17 minutes but we did at no point park or pull into a bay. My partner is also happy to act as a witness if that is possible and would help.

Is that even a usable defence? It was so long ago the only reason I can remember anything on an unremarkable day nearly six years ago  from a random day in 2016 is because it was the only time we have ever been there!

You can use this as a basis for a defence but the way it is written is more like a witness statement (WS).  Defences are written in the third person (check out the new standard defence template and add you particular defence points in using the same style).  Keep your defence to short, punchy legal/technical arguments and you can then support and back it up with evidence at WS stage.