Excel Parking Charge Notice to keeper

Umkomaas

Place the bit in para 3 about you being neither the driver nor a passenger into para 2. 

for an alleged parking penalty

No, not a 'penalty' surely?  Was the word used anywhere by the Claimant?

KeithP

I think I would reduce your paragraph 4 to just the first sentence.

The rest of your para 4, and your paras 5 and 6, are detail that would be better placed in your Witness Statement later.

Similarly, your para 7 should be saved for your Witness Statement.
It then follows that your para 8 should start...
8. The Claimant did not conform... 

casper1299

Thank you umkomaas and Keith p for your suggestions. I think I'm getting it. I'll amend it and post it again

1505grandad

"I received a PCN from Excel for a parking without payment contravention date 31/10/2021......."

You should be using/quoting IPC CoP V8 dated 1.7.2021  -  the para numbers are different and some wording.

casper1299

Thank you 1505grandad. I've amend. 
Any more comments gratefully recieved

casper1299

This is my 2nd draft of the defence, please comment

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. The Defendant was neither driver nor passenger of the vehicle.

 

3.  The Defendant was first made aware of the alleged charges by post late November 2021 for an alleged parking charge dated xxxxxxxx. The Defendant was at a completely different location at the time of the alleged incidence. The driver was insured to drive the vehicle, but there is no legal obligation to name the person.

 

4. The Defendant as the registered keeper of the vehicle in question at the time, notes that they cannot be held liable due to the Claimant not complying with the ‘keeper liability’ requirements set out in the Protection of Freedom Act 2012 (“POFA”), Schedule 4.

 

5.  The Claimant did not conform with the requirements of the IPC CoP V8 dated 1.7.2021, of which it is an accredited member, regarding Grace Periods. Specifically, it failed under CoP 13.1 to allow the driver a sufficient Consideration Period so they may make an informed decision as to whether or not to enter or remain on the Private Land.    

 

6.  The Claimant is put to strict proof of the synchronisation and calibration of the 'in' and 'out' cameras, which in this industry are known to often be minutes out with each other, generating unfair and unproven parking charges for vehicles that were only stopped for a few minutes.

 

7.  The Claimant has not provided any evidence to back up their allegation that the vehicle was “parked” on site. The claimant has only provided poor quality ANPR pictures on entry and exit of a registration plate, not of the vehicle in question. No evidence captured by ANPR shows any reference points in the carpark to determine if the vehicle was at this location.

 

8.  The Defendant has visited the location for research purposes and found the signage of the car park was inadequate, not visible, and poorly lit. There was one small sign at the entrance to inform visitors that the property was private land, although it should be noted that this notice is written in very small print and is not well lit making it impossible to read while entering the private land in the dark. This is even more difficult to read and notice when you consider that the driver is entering the car park from a busy road and crossing a public footpath, and due to there being a dual-lane entrance and exit onto the road, it would only take a van or people carrier to be exiting to completely obscure that sign as you drive in.

casper1299

Evening all, I have posted my 2nd attempt of my defence. If anyone could kindly look over it I would be most grateful.
Any advice/ comments would be much appreciated 

Coupon-mad

Looks like it covers all the bases.

casper1299

Thank you coupon-mad. It's reassuring that there are people you can reach out to for advice.

1505grandad

Para 4  -  PoFA = Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ("s" on end of Freedom)