Help with defences please

ANTIUKCPM

Hello everyone, 

I have two claim forms which I have written a defence for (albeit not very well). I have copied coupon mads defence (thank you very much), and ONLY amended sections 2 and 3 - is this correct? 

The first claim is regarding my car having stopped outside a private block of flats. 
The second claim is regarding my car stopping outside the Sainsburys in the same complex for a few minutes. 


Please can someone check my defences are okay? 

CLAIM 1

The facts as known to the Defendant:

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

3.1. The defendant does not accept fault with regards to the claim as the vehicle was engaged in loading and was not parked. As it was not parked, no contract was entered into, and the claimants access to the DVLA keeper database was unlawful and in breach of DPA 2018. It is important to draw the distinction between "parking" and "loading/unloading", as this would not constitute a breach of contract. 

In Jopson Vs. Homeguard, case no: B9GF0A9E, which had seen this appeal allowed, his honour Judge Harris QC mentions that loading/unloading is not parking:

"19. The purported prohibition was upon "parking", and it is possible to draw a real and sensible distinction between pausing for a few moments or minutes to enable passengers to alight or for awkward or heavy items to be unloaded, and parking in the sense of leaving a car for some significant duration of time”

and

"20. Neither party was able to direct the court to any authority on the meaning of the word “park”. However, the Shorter Oxford Dictionary has the following: “To leave a vehicle in a carpark or other reserved space” and “To leave in a suitable place until required.” The concept of parking, as opposed to stopping, is that of leaving a car for some duration of time beyond that needed for getting in or out of it, loading or unloading it, and perhaps coping with some vicissitude of short duration, such as changing a wheel in the event of a puncture. Merely to stop a vehicle cannot be to park it; otherwise traffic jams would consist of lines of parked cars. Delivery vans, whether for post, newspapers, groceries, or anything else, would not be accommodated on an interpretation which included vehicles stopping for a few moment for these purposes. Discussion in this area left the respondent in obvious difficulties, from which the attractive advocacy of Miss Fenwick was unable to rescue it."

and 

"21. Whether a car is parked, or simply stopped, or left for a moment while unloading, or (to take an example discussed in argument) accompanying a frail person inside, must be a question of fact or degree. I think in the end this was agreed. A milkman leaving his float to carry bottles to the flat would not be “parked”. Nor would a postman delivering letters, a wine merchant delivering a case of wine, and nor, I am satisfied, a retailer’s van, or indeed the appellant, unloading an awkward piece of furniture. Any other approach would leave life in the block of flats close to unworkable, a consideration which those instructing Miss Fenwick seemed reluctant to accept. I am quite satisfied, and I find as a fact, that while the appellant’s car had been stationary for more than a minute and without its driver for the same period (whatever precisely it was), while she carried in her desk, it was not “parked”. Accordingly, for that reason too, the appellant was not liable to the charge stipulated in the respondent’s notice."

3.2. The defendant suffers with significant autoimmune disorders which they feel the claimant should take into consideration as part of the clients accessibility policy for the less abled.

3.3. The signage is poorly placed and not easily legible for a common layperson to comply with.  Further to this, the defendant is aware that there is a legally binding grace period (BPA Approved Operator Scheme's Code of Practice) before the issuing of a penalty and feels they were not granted this period. 

3.4. The defendant is aware that double yellow lines mean no parking. They do not mean no stopping unless there are kerb blips. 

CLAIM 2

The facts as known to the Defendant:

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

3.1. The defendant does not accept fault with regards to the claim as the vehicle was engaged in loading and was not parked. As it was not parked, no contract was entered into, and the claimants access to the DVLA keeper database was unlawful and in breach of DPA 2018. It is important to draw the distinction between "parking" and "loading/unloading", as this would not constitute a breach of contract. 

In Jopson Vs. Homeguard, case no: B9GF0A9E, which had seen this appeal allowed, his honour Judge Harris QC mentions that loading/unloading is not parking:

"19. The purported prohibition was upon "parking", and it is possible to draw a real and sensible distinction between pausing for a few moments or minutes to enable passengers to alight or for awkward or heavy items to be unloaded, and parking in the sense of leaving a car for some significant duration of time”

and

"20. Neither party was able to direct the court to any authority on the meaning of the word “park”. However, the Shorter Oxford Dictionary has the following: “To leave a vehicle in a carpark or other reserved space” and “To leave in a suitable place until required.” The concept of parking, as opposed to stopping, is that of leaving a car for some duration of time beyond that needed for getting in or out of it, loading or unloading it, and perhaps coping with some vicissitude of short duration, such as changing a wheel in the event of a puncture. Merely to stop a vehicle cannot be to park it; otherwise traffic jams would consist of lines of parked cars. Delivery vans, whether for post, newspapers, groceries, or anything else, would not be accommodated on an interpretation which included vehicles stopping for a few moment for these purposes. Discussion in this area left the respondent in obvious difficulties, from which the attractive advocacy of Miss Fenwick was unable to rescue it."

and 

"21. Whether a car is parked, or simply stopped, or left for a moment while unloading, or (to take an example discussed in argument) accompanying a frail person inside, must be a question of fact or degree. I think in the end this was agreed. A milkman leaving his float to carry bottles to the flat would not be “parked”. Nor would a postman delivering letters, a wine merchant delivering a case of wine, and nor, I am satisfied, a retailer’s van, or indeed the appellant, unloading an awkward piece of furniture. Any other approach would leave life in the block of flats close to unworkable, a consideration which those instructing Miss Fenwick seemed reluctant to accept. I am quite satisfied, and I find as a fact, that while the appellant’s car had been stationary for more than a minute and without its driver for the same period (whatever precisely it was), while she carried in her desk, it was not “parked”. Accordingly, for that reason too, the appellant was not liable to the charge stipulated in the respondent’s notice."

3.2. The defendant suffers with significant autoimmune disorders which they feel the claimant should take into consideration as part of the clients accessibility policy for the less abled.

3.3. The signage is poorly placed and not easily legible for a common layperson to comply with.  Further to this, the defendant is aware that there is a legally binding grace period (BPA Approved Operator Scheme's Code of Practice) before the issuing of a penalty and feels they were not granted this period. 

3.4. The defendant is aware that double yellow lines mean no parking. They do not mean no stopping unless there are kerb blips. 

I would be so grateful if someone can help, I feel very lost even though the forum has provided so much information. 

Many thanks!

Coupon-mad

You already have a thread about one of these cases, please continue that one here:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6344543/four-pcn-from-ukcpm-2-lbcs-with-no-previous-response-do-i-have-a-leg-to-stand-on#latest

Then keep this one ONLY for the second claim. Tell us the date of issue if the claims and are they both same PPC, same solicitor, same date, same car and same site?

They should have brought ONE claim.

ANTIUKCPM

Coupon-mad said:

You already have a thread about one of these cases, please continue that one here:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6344543/four-pcn-from-ukcpm-2-lbcs-with-no-previous-response-do-i-have-a-leg-to-stand-on#latest

Then keep this one ONLY for the second claim. Tell us the date of issue if the claims and are they both same PPC, same solicitor, same date, same car and same site?

They should have brought ONE claim.

Hi there,

The previous thread is about the same two cases so should I post the defences there? 

the date of issue is 14/06/22 for both PCNS, the same PPC, same solicitor, same car and site.
Date of claim 1 is 15/08/2019 
Date of claim 2 is 26/07/2019

The claim 1 defence above is incorrect but I am a new member so cannot edit. So the right defence is: 

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

3.1. The defendant does not accept fault with regards to the claim as they are legally permitted to load and offload in the location where the penalty was issued with consent from the legal owner of the residence. The vehicle was engaged in continuous loading and was not parked. As it was not parked, no contract was entered into, and the claimants access to the DVLA keeper database was unlawful and in breach of DPA 2018. It is important to draw the distinction between "parking" and "loading/unloading", as this would not constitute a breach of contract. 

In Jopson Vs. Homeguard, case no: B9GF0A9E, which had seen this appeal allowed, his honour Judge Harris QC mentions that loading/unloading is not parking:

"19. The purported prohibition was upon "parking", and it is possible to draw a real and sensible distinction between pausing for a few moments or minutes to enable passengers to alight or for awkward or heavy items to be unloaded, and parking in the sense of leaving a car for some significant duration of time"

and

"20. Neither party was able to direct the court to any authority on the meaning of the word “park”. However, the Shorter Oxford Dictionary has the following: “To leave a vehicle in a carpark or other reserved space” and “To leave in a suitable place until required.” The concept of parking, as opposed to stopping, is that of leaving a car for some duration of time beyond that needed for getting in or out of it, loading or unloading it, and perhaps coping with some vicissitude of short duration, such as changing a wheel in the event of a puncture. Merely to stop a vehicle cannot be to park it; otherwise traffic jams would consist of lines of parked cars. Delivery vans, whether for post, newspapers, groceries, or anything else, would not be accommodated on an interpretation which included vehicles stopping for a few moment for these purposes. Discussion in this area left the respondent in obvious difficulties, from which the attractive advocacy of Miss Fenwick was unable to rescue it."

and 

"21. Whether a car is parked, or simply stopped, or left for a moment while unloading, or (to take an example discussed in argument) accompanying a frail person inside, must be a question of fact or degree. I think in the end this was agreed. A milkman leaving his float to carry bottles to the flat would not be “parked”. Nor would a postman delivering letters, a wine merchant delivering a case of wine, and nor, I am satisfied, a retailer’s van, or indeed the appellant, unloading an awkward piece of furniture. Any other approach would leave life in the block of flats close to unworkable, a consideration which those instructing Miss Fenwick seemed reluctant to accept. I am quite satisfied, and I find as a fact, that while the appellant’s car had been stationary for more than a minute and without its driver for the same period (whatever precisely it was), while she carried in her desk, it was not “parked”. Accordingly, for that reason too, the appellant was not liable to the charge stipulated in the respondent’s notice."

3.2. The defendant suffers with significant autoimmune disorders which they feel the claimant should take into consideration as part of the clients accessibility policy for the less abled.

3.3. The car was not left parked for a significant period of time and was simply stopped for the purpose of offloading into the residence. The signage is poorly placed and not easily legible for a common layperson to comply with.  Further to this, the defendant is aware that there is a legally binding grace period (BPA Approved Operator Scheme's Code of Practice) before the issuing of a penalty and feels they were not granted this period. 

Thanks coupon mad

ANTIUKCPM

Do I keep points 4-26 from the template the same for my defences? 

Coupon-mad

Yes you do - and yes, please reply there instead.

Don't start any new threads please as it loses context.

ANTIUKCPM

Ok I have posted there, please kindly help. Many thanks, sorry for the inconveniences.