2x Seperate Parking Tickets (I Know!) At Different Stages

marineralpha

Very basic I know but I don't really have a great deal more to say on the matter

IN THE COUNTY COURT

 

Claim No.:  xxxxxx

 

Between

 

UK Parking Control Ltd

 

(Claimant)

 

- and - 

 

Sean Finnigan

 

 (Defendant)

 

_________________

 

DEFENCE

 

1. The parking charges referred to in this claim did not arise from any agreement of terms. The charge and the claim was an unexpected shock. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.  It is denied that any conduct by the driver was a breach of any prominent term and it is denied that this Claimant (understood to have a bare licence as managers) has standing to sue or form contracts in their own name. Liability is denied, whether or not the Claimant is claiming 'keeper liability', which is unclear from the Particulars.

 

The facts as known to the Defendant:

 

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

 

3. On the day in question the defendant cannot be certain of who was using the car. There are multiple people with legal access to the car and therefore it cannot be determined who was in charge of the vehicle at the time of the offence.

Coupon-mad

Point 3 only has legs if you also argue that the NTK was non-POFA. Was it?  Read any Highview claim thread; they all cover this wording if it is non-POFA.

Are you not able to help the Judge understand why the car might have been there; what sort of car park it is and what connection the family has (often shops there? Lives there? Uses the railway station or what?). That draft doesn't even tell the court what sort of car park it is or that, on the balance of probabilities, the driver was permitted.

Give the poor Judge what you DO know as well as what you don't.  Otherwise you aren't even denying that maybe the driver was an unauthorised blagger trespassing on private land!

marineralpha

I am unsure if it was non-POFA (or even what this means if I'm honest), I do not have the original NTK. I have a later 'notification letter' which does not mention anything like this.

I can elaborate further on the other point though.

Le_Kirk

Why do you not have the NTK?  Did you move and not inform DVLA of your COA?  Did you throw it away?  POFA and its meaning is explained in the NEWBIE sticky but in general terms if the NTK was not POFA compliant, the parking company cannot hold the keeper liable for the actions of the driver.  Have you submitted SAR to the PPC?  Your data (including the NTK) might not come back in time for your defence but certainly useful at witness statement time.

marineralpha

Below is the original NTK: 

Coupon-mad

You can see from the POFA wording that it is a POFA PCN, which means the keeper can be held liable even if they were not driving.

marineralpha

So I'm screwed basically? Is there any way to reduce the amount being demanded?

Coupon-mad

That's not what I said. No.

Anyone who thanks they are screwed (particularly by a laughable UKPC effort) needs to read more threads and the NEWBIES thread more carefully!

marineralpha

Sorry....a bit of a dramatic response from myself I suppose

marineralpha

So where do I go with this then? My only defense really is that I don't know who was driving the car. It was parked wrongly in a disabled bay which tells me that my grandmother must have been in the car (now deceased). I cannot be certain but I believe she had a disabled badge and again I don't know if that is applicable to a person or certain vehicle.

I'm sorry if I am frustrating you all but I do have a hard time reading and although very informative I find the stickies difficult to navigate, it's not a case of me just being lazy.