Post Office Claim Form

splodge2018

Hi guys,

I have written my defense (first draft). How do I post on here as it's too long to add to the comment box? 

Many thanks,

Le_Kirk

Split it over two boxes OR preferably JUST post paragraphs 2 & 3 and any others that you have modified; we don't need to see the rest of the template as it is standard!

splodge2018

Hi Guys,

See below my defense.

Please let me know if i need to adapt in anyway as not sure if some of the bit's I've said will be dismissed by the court.

thanks 

The facts as known to the Defendant:

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

3. I parked at the location in question to post Christmas presents to family on 17/12/2018. I was parked up for under 12 minutes and left the car park thinking I’d done what was needed as per the signage at the time. I did see the large sign (Fig 1) which reads ‘Post Office customer parking only, unauthorised use £100 fine, please read terms and conditions’ I then read the teams and conditions which you can see in (Fig 2), they do not mention anything about putting in your number plate inside the Post Office so I thought I’d done what was asked of me.

I have pictures of this sign taken a few weeks after the PCN was issued. The car park is very poorly lit and you can see from (Fig 4). Civil Enforcement Limited have used the word ‘fine’ in their signage which after research know this is not correct and is known as a parking charge notice. I did highlight this in my communication to them but since then the sign has been replaced yet the word ‘fine’ is still being used.

I did write to the claimant highlighting I used the Post Office on the day in question and asked it they could review the CCTV as they would see me using the Post Office and would be able to retract the PCN but this wasn’t looked in to. This would have saved a lot of time and work for both parties.

I was unaware of the non-prominent system to input vehicle registration numbers (VRNs) into a small keypad in the Post Office. The Claimant has not provided proof that the keypad was in working order, at the material time. I’ve recently been back to the car park on 11/04/22 to review the keypad and as you can see from (Fig 5), the keypad is not very noticeable with no obvious signs telling you what to do. You’ll also see from the (Fig 5) that the car park is now giving 45 mins free parking which is an inconstancy as I’m being asked for over £300 for actually using the Post Office and being park for under 12 minutes. 

 

When I received the first PCN letter the charge was set at £100 but if paid within 14 days, then the charge would be reduced to £60 which is an abuse as process.

I’ve recently written to my local MP Mr David Davis and highlighted the fat that there are number of people who have not seen the keypad or noticed any obvious signs to enter their details. I’ve received an email back from Mr Davis who’s looking in to the issue and is writing to the Post Office.

I feel this shows that the signage needs to be improved as it’s not just the defendant who has not seen this detail. Here is one of the many stories that show this and the fact the car park is poorly lit. https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news/hull-east-yorkshire-news/hull-man-fined-100-post-2557378   

Fruitcake

A defence should be written in the third person, so defendant, not me, myself, you, or I.

It also reads more like a witness statement than a defence. Evidence does not go with the defence, but later at the WS/exhibits stage.

Coupon-mad

Why haven't you added 'and driver' to #2 as the template defence advises, if true?

Your #3 is too long and more like stuff you'd save for your WS later.  It will be fine then but is too much detail now.

You also don't put 'I' in a defence.

splodge2018

Hi all, 

Here the revised defense. Looking to email this today.

Thank you

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

3. The defendant parked at the location in question to use the Post Office to send Christmas presents to family on 17/12/2018. The defendant was parked up for under 12 minutes to use the Post Office services.

The defendant did read the signage which said ‘Post Office customer parking only, unauthorised use £100 fine, please read terms and conditions’. The defendant then read the terms and conditions which mentioned nothing of inputting car registration details into a key pad in side the building.

While in the Post Office the defendant was not told about a key pad by any member of staff and did not see the key pad in the building or any signs asking to enter in details.

The defendant is not even sure if there was a keypad inside the building or knows if this key pad in mention was even working on the day in question.

If the signage was clear in the car park and highlighted a key pad in the terms and conditions, then the defendant would have followed these instructions.  

Coupon-mad

Every paragraph needs a number.  Maybe add:

The defendant is not even sure if there was a keypad inside the building or knows if this key pad in mention was even working on the day in question.  The Claimant is put to strict proof.

If the signage was clear in the car park and within the Post Office, which prominently highlighted a key pad in the terms and conditions, then the defendant would have followed these instructions.  

splodge2018

Thank you Coupon-mad 

Le_Kirk

splodge2018 said:

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

3. The defendant parked at the location in question to use the Post Office to use postal services. to send Christmas presents to family on 17/12/2018. The defendant was parked up for under 12 minutes to use the Post Office services.

4. The defendant did read the signage which said ‘Post Office customer parking only, unauthorised use £100 fine, please read terms and conditions’. As a user of the post office, the defendant was de facto authorised.  The defendant then read the terms and conditions which mentioned nothing of inputting car registration details into a key pad inside the building.

5. While in the Post Office the defendant was not told about a key pad by any member of staff and did not see the key pad in the building nor any signs asking to enter in details.

6. The defendant is not even sure if there was a keypad inside the building or knows if this key pad in mention question was even working on the day in question.

7. If the signage was clear in the car park and highlighted a key pad in the terms and conditions, then the defendant would have followed these instructions.  

Suggestions above.  Irrelevant what you were sending, you just used the post office!

splodge2018

Hey guys,

Struggling to find the parking firm's legal team or solicitor for Civil Enforcement LTD. I've looked around on here and there are a number of different ones and not sure which is correct. 

Any help would be apricated.

Thank you