Getting change of address sorted for PCNs

Coupon-mad

3 & 4 could be removed (save the narrative till WS stage) and also remove the whole of para 8 onwards to the end of your draft.

Any protest about the POFA rules on NTHs is not relevant because you are the admitted driver, so they don't have to hang their hat on POFA at all.

But leave in paragraph 12 re Jopson, how about talking about grace periods in para 3 and (briefly) mention that you were unloading, and cite Jopson as para 4 so it is higher up?

Lought_TA

Thanks to @Le_Kirk and @Coupon-mad - I will redraft over the weekend and post up again early next week.

Lought_TA

I have tweaked it to the following - trying to make it sharper and remove all "I":

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the hirer and driver of the vehicle in question.

3. The Defendant was using the hired vehicle to load up various belongings from their flat. There were two separate loading events on the day in question.

4. There is legal precedent regarding unloading and loading in Jopson vs Homeguard (case number B9GF0A9E). Judge Harris stated in this case that loading and unloading is not parking. The Claimant’s PCN stated that the Defendant was “parked in an area for longer than the maximum time.” However this legal precedent states that loading is not parking and therefore invalidates the PCN. This case has to date not been overturned and is therefore persuasive on the lower courts.

5. Furthermore, as part of the Defendant’s tenancy agreement, a parking space within the Moseley Row car park was allowed which was accessible by a secure fob. Further access into School Square was also permitted by a secure fob with an entry/exit barrier at the end of School Bank Road to stop access during peak school times.

6. Having lived on the site since 2015 and gained access to the School Square area in a vehicle when required, the Defendant did not expect any change to access arrangements onto School Square and any changes had not been communicated to the Defendant.

7. The Defendant has since returned to the site to carry out research on foot and observed a “Permit Holders only” sign at the barrier with further information to be found on other signs. This is therefore forbidding and does not offer any right to park with no alternative option.

Re: grace periods. I'm unsure what argument I have here. I was loading the vehicle for just under 2 hours the first time. Do grace periods come into play here? Apologies if this is obvious, just wanted to make sure I'm not missing another part of my defence I can use.

Coupon-mad

I was thinking that their photos are likely to be just minutes apart? ...or did they take them over a longer period, in which case grace periods is not a thing, in your case.

Defence looks good.

Lought_TA

Thanks @Coupon-mad - had a look at the photos on their PCNs and they are spread over a longer period.

I've still got a bit of time before the deadline so I'll keep researching on the forum to see if there are any other angles of defence to include (I don't think there is from what I've read so far) and then wait on their next response when I send off later in the week.

Coupon-mad

There is this very recent addition to DCBLegal case defences (cribbed from a Judge's words especially about poorly pleaded DCBLegal roboclaims):
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/79849685#Comment_79849685

If yours is not about multiple PCNs just remove the words about 'multiple/several' allegations.

Lought_TA

Ok excellent - had a read of that thread.

Are you suggesting for my points #8-15 in defence I add the "The Defendant received no PCNs and is unable, on the basis of the incoherent Particulars of Claim ('POC')..." and the other points listed before reverting back to the newbies template for point #16?

Coupon-mad

Well obviously you remove stuff that's not true (i.e. no saying you "received no PCNs" if you did!).  That particular 3 word phrase isn't the point if what I was showing you.  The rest is!

And don't remove any of the template defence.  You'd be using the lot then re-numbering up to thirty-something paragraphs.

Lought_TA

Will add a slightly tweaked version of that into my defence and get sent off.

Thanks @Coupon-mad again and will come back when I hear more.

Lought_TA

Short update on this one - had an e-mail from DCBL recently to confirm that their client intends to proceed with the claim. They did offer the option to call if I want to discuss a settlement and attached their client's N180 form.

Seems to be following a similar theme to other DCBL threads so I'll wait for my N180 form to come through.