Highview Parking - defence

f1fan12

Coupon-mad said:

f1fan12 said:

When you say how did that happen then, I’m unsure what you mean ? 

I’ve only acknowledged I was the driver on my defence letter, nothing else, I’ve ignored all correspondence as I believed nothing would come of it. 

You've already put a defence in?  What did it say?

Not yet filed a defence I have just written it into my defence letter, I shall change the wording tonight and re-post the updated defence. 

KeithP

With a Claim Issue Date of 13th April, you have until Tuesday 3rd May to file an Acknowledgment of Service but there is nothing to be gained by delaying it. 

To file an Acknowledgment of Service, follow the guidance in the Dropbox file linked from the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 16th May 2022 to file your Defence.

That's almost 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 again at the second post on the NEWBIES thread - immediately following where you found the Acknowledgment of Service instructions.

Don't miss the deadline for filing an Acknowledgment of Service, nor that 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'.

KeithP

f1fan12 said:

I know I was driving as the ANPR camera that has photographed me is front facing, although unclear on the PCN that it is me, I dont want to run the risk that they have a clearer picture for me to be able to deny being the driver.

OK, so they have a picture of someone driving a car.
How on earth do you think they can possibly put a name to that person?
They certainly do not have a searchable database that allows them to put a name to that face.

f1fan12

Okay so you suggest I deny being the driver and adapt my defence to that, should it still follow the same template or is there a different template to use ? 

Coupon-mad

No-one is telling you to deny driving.

Fruitcake

I used to work with a bloke that looked like me. People thought he was my brother. People sometimes thought I was him and he was me.
You must not lie if asked by a judge if you were you driving, but can you honestly remember the event exactly as it happened so long ago? Are you sure it was that specific day and not the day before, or the day after, or a fortnight come Tuesday after? Unless some major world event happened that day, or some major personal event, are you absolutely 100% sure you know the identity of the driver on the date in question?

f1fan12

is there a defence template with the Pofa defence wording on it

Coupon-mad

Yes.  Every Highview defence thread for the past year.  Read any!

f1fan12

Good Evening, 
I have yet to complete the AoS, but I have now adapted a couple of templates as  below: 

3. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.  It is denied that a contract was entered into - by conduct or otherwise - whereby it was ‘agreed’ to pay a ‘parking charge’ and it is denied that this Claimant (understood to have a bare licence as managers) has standing to sue, nor to form contracts in their own name at the location.

4. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question but liability is denied. The identity of the driver at the material time is unknown to the defendant. The Defendant was not the only insured driver of the vehicle in question and is unable to recall who was driving on that unremarkable day over 5 and a half years ago.

5. The Defendant was issued with a Claim Form by DCB Legal acting on behalf of the Claimant Highview Parking Limited for a Total amount of £XXX (inclusive of £35 Court Fee & £50 Legal representative's costs). Through research the Defendant has come to understand the PCN(s) relates to a PCN(s) that was issued against the Defendant’s vehicle XXX, over 5 and a half years ago on XX August 2016 at XXX.

6. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.  It is denied that a contract was entered into - by conduct or otherwise - whereby it was ‘agreed’ to pay a ‘parking charge’ and it is denied that this Claimant (understood to have a bare licence as managers) has standing to sue, nor to form contracts in their own name at the location.

7. In the Particulars of Claim ('POC') it is stated that the Defendant is liable as the driver or keeper but the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence that Defendant was also the driver. The Defendant cannot be held liable for the charges as the keeper of the vehicle. The Claimant did not properly serve a compliant notice to keeper in strict accordance with Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA).

8. Following on from [4] & [5] (in PoFA), where it is noted that the Claimant has elected not to comply with the 'keeper liability' requirements set out in PoFA, Claimant has included a clear falsehood in their POC which were signed under a statement of truth by the Claimant's legal representative who should know (as the Claimant undoubtedly does) that it is untrue to state that the Defendant is 'liable as keeper'.  This can never be the case with a Highview Parking Limited claim because this parking firm, same as any Group Nexus company, have never used the POFA 2012 wording, of their own volition.  Not only does the POC include this misleading untruth, but the Claimant has also added an unidentified sum in false 'damages' to enhance the claims.  So sparse is their statement of case, that the Claimant has failed to even state any facts about the alleged breach or the amount of the parking charge that was on the signage, because it cannot have been over £100. Which then leads to the question, how does the Claimant arrive at the Amount Claimed for a Total of £XXX. The Defendant has excluded the £35 Court Fee & £50 Legal representative's costs from the Total amount for the purposes of this defence point. 

9. The Parking and Traffic Appeals Service (PATAS) and Parking on Private Land Appeals (POPLA) Lead Adjudicator and barrister, Henry Michael Greenslade, clarified that with regards to keeper liability, “There is no ‘reasonable presumption’ in law that the registered keeper of a vehicle is the driver and the operators should never suggest anything of the sort” (POPLA report 2015).


After this which I have numbered 10. and so on, I have copied the template from March 2022, will this defence be sitable to submit or should any parts be removed from my initial 3 - 9 paragraphs. 

Thanks

KeithP

f1fan12 said:

I have yet to complete the AoS...

Don't overlook that. No need to delay filing an Acknowledgment of Service.

As I said earlier...

KeithP said:

...you have until Tuesday 3rd May to file an Acknowledgment of Service but there is nothing to be gained by delaying it.

Should take less than ten minutes.