BW LEGAL County Court Claim Issued - please help

KeithP

Asd345 said:

The form is dated 20/07/2022. 

With a Claim Issue Date of 20th July, you have until Monday 8th August 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 22nd August 2022 to file your Defence.

That's 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'.

Coupon-mad

Yes, use the template. It has space for your facts.  No attachments go at this stage.

Do you know for sure you input the right car VRM and the right Location code?

patient_dream

Asd345 said:

Hi,
Sure, I will wait for other member to reply. I have also read other sticky threads too. I am just wondering if I need to include all of the defence points in the template letter? Because my case is slightly different, in a way that all parking fees were paid on the day and I can prove this. Surely, this alone will be enough to throw the case out? 

There were 3 different tickets in total.

I agree, 100% proof that you paid and they have no case.  BWLegal has ignored you
Infact there is a case where there is unreasonable behaviour by them

SO ...
3 Tickets at £100 = £300
Court cost = £70
Legal costs = you have not said
Interest at 8% which is well above rates for a long time.  Where they get 8% from is an outdated County Courts Act and Senior Courts Act allow claims for interest at 8% per annum.   Judges mostly do not allow this 

So £370 as above, add on their legal charge and that is well below the £835.48 they are claiming.

The fake add-on of £240 cannot be explained by the them as it is just a fabrication by the BPA to extort more money. As seen in the BPA's code of practice , this fabrication was invented by a BPA board member who is also a debt chaser

In the Beavis v Parking Eye case in the Supreme Court, it was the ruled that the charge of the ticket, in your case £100 each, covered the cost of operating the scheme.
As usual, BWL ignores the Supreme Court and adds their own fake amount

From the figures above, you can work out what the claim should really be

And, as you have paid and have proof, the judge can only go one way and dismiss the claim as false.  However, you can claim unreasonable costs and we know of cases where a judge has awarded £1000.  There is also a data breach by NCP

This will end up as yet another spanking in court for BWL

Asd345

Thank you! I have now submitted the AoS, as per the guidance provided. 

Yes, I believe the correct details were provided. The payment was made by someone else with me on that day, I have the receipts and the said person's bank statements. I'll double check the car reg etc. 

I believe next step now for me is to prepare my defence? I'll look a the sticky threads again and follow the guidance. Thank you.

Not_A_Hope

Don't forget to try to get the hotel to get this unfair PCN cancelled in parallel with defending the claim. 

Umkomaas

Because my case is slightly different, in a way that all parking fees were paid on the day and I can prove this.

It's no different, I'm afraid, to many other threads we've seen here where the payment has been made, with proof.  PPCs don't carefully read appeals/evidence, that's not the business they are in. They exist to make money. Cancelling on appeal doesn't earn them a bean!

Surely, this alone will be enough to throw the case out? 

Not at PPC level. Maybe at POPLA, but few guarantees these days on that front. More than likely at court. But unlikely that NCP will let it go that far, but them giving up will not occur until they've tried to wear you down in the hope you will pay. It could take months, even years. 

They have 6 years to instigate court proceedings - and we are currently seeing many cases (across the PPC network, not specifically NCP) where court claims are coming out of the woodwork 5+ years after the parking incident. 

Asd345

Having acknowledged the claim, I am now working on the defence.

Below is what I intend to submit - can someone please read it and advise? I have only 3 points in defence and my key point is that no contravention occurred. Parking was paid for each date in question, via their paybyphone app, with location ref and car reg provided. This can be evidenced in court via screenshots from the app, and bank statements showing monies being debited. In light of this, I think this alone will be sufficient to win this case. So, should I leave my defence as it is (see below) or should I edit the rest of the paragraphs from the template too? Thank you for your time, I really appreciate it.

National Car Parks Ltd

(Claimant) 

- and -  

xxx

 (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 xx (the Defendant) was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question.

3. On the days in question, the defendant parked the vehicle in the car park on 18/06/2021, 19/06/2021 & 20/06/2021. The parking charges were paid for each day in question by the defendant’s partner, and correct vehicle registration details (VRN) provided. Parking was paid via  the app called “pay by phone”, as per the instructions on the signage on the site. Location reference number & car registration details were provided. The parking fee covered the duration the car was parked for in the car park. As such, defendant strongly denies any parking breaches occurred and requests the court to dismiss this case.

Should I add anything else?

Coupon-mad

Hmmmm...I predict this was a VRM error, possibly your partner using an app they already had, that defaulted to their own car VRM?:

I believe the correct details were provided. The payment was made by someone else with me on that day, I have the receipts and the said person's bank statements. I'll double check the car reg etc.

Find out for sure before you put your defence in.  A VRM typo is still a good defence (because the parking firm should have spotted it and matched the payment) but you need to know what happened before that defence goes in.

The app firm can confirm the VRM used for those transactions.

Le_Kirk

So, should I leave my defence as it is (see below) or should I edit the rest of the paragraphs from the template too?

Notwithstanding what @Coupon-mad said, you do not need to (and we don't recommend it) to edit any (more) of the template defence, just don't forget to add it in before sending it by e-mail.

1505grandad

Add "and driver" after keeper in para 2.