PCN Defence Draft - review required please

RedRobin88

Hello, 

Looking for advice on a defence written for my family member please. 

Issue date: 4th July 
AOS filed: 22nd July

I have read many previous posts similar and come up with the below. 

Also just felt it worth noting that the 'particulars of claim' on the Claim Form notes 'the defendant agreed to pay within 28 days but did not'. I have checked with the family member who has said no contact was made at any point. Presume this makes no difference to the case? 

Draft defence:

The facts as known to the Defendant:

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

3. Upon arrival at the retail car park in question there were no mother and baby parking bays vacant. The Defendant is a mother of two young children with a new-born baby and required a wider space to safely take the children from the car.

3.1. The Defendant therefore parked further away from the adjacent car to allow for the car doors to be opened wide enough for the baby car seat to be removed. This meant the vehicle wheels were across the white line of the adjacent bay on the opposite side.

3.2. The Defendant went into the retail store directly outside the parking bay to purchase essentials and returned to the car within 10 - 15 minutes. Within this time a parking ticket had been placed on the car.

3.3. At the time there were many [non mother and baby] parking bays available, meaning the Defendant had not disadvantaged other motorists. The contravention, if there was any, could therefore be considered de minimis.

3.4. The car park is a free car park and did not require a paid for parking ticket.

3.5. During the Supreme Court deliberation as to whether Parking Eye's claim was a penalty charge. Lord Toulson states “There may be reasons why a user parks with his wheels outside the marked bay (for example because of the way the adjacent vehicle is parked or because he is a wheelchair user and none of the blue bays are available). Examples could be multiplied. The point is that the penalty clause makes no allowance for circumstances, allows no period of grace and provides no room for adjustment”. Unlike in the case referenced (Parking Eye v Beavis 4th November 2015) the defendant did not overstay, nor was it parked in such a way it disadvantaged other shoppers or the regular turnover of customer.

Thank you in advance. RedRobin

KeithP

RedRobin88 said:

Issue date: 4th July 
AOS filed: 22nd July

With a Claim Issue Date of 4th July, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 8th August 2022 to file your Defence.

That's nearly two weeks away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence and it is good to see that you are not leaving it to the last minute.

To create a Defence, and then file a Defence by email, look at the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Don't miss the deadline 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'.

KeithP

RedRobin88 said:

Also just felt it worth noting that the 'particulars of claim' on the Claim Form notes 'the defendant agreed to pay within 28 days but did not'. I have checked with the family member who has said no contact was made at any point. Presume this makes no difference to the case? 

The allegation is that by parking the driver agreed to the terms of the contract.

Those contract terms are the terms on the signs.

Almost certainly there is a term on the signs stating something like "if the driver doesn't park in accordance with the rules then he agrees to pay £nn within 28 days...".

Umkomaas

Is this different to your other thread currently on this first page of the forum?  If so, who is the parking firm and solicitors involved here please?

Le_Kirk

Seems to be a different issue @Umkomaas, the other one was at a rental property.

RedRobin88

@Umkomaas correct this is a different one I am helping a family member with. The parking company is: UK Parking Control Ltd. The solicitor is: DCB Legal Ltd. Thanks 

Umkomaas

RedRobin88 said:

@Umkomaas correct this is a different one I am helping a family member with. The parking company is: UK Parking Control Ltd. The solicitor is: DCB Legal Ltd. Thanks 

Please have a look at some of the UKPC/DCB Legal threads posting over the past couple of weeks and note that a number, having gone through much of the process of defending the claim, are receiving an 'offer to settle', which, if refused, is followed shortly by a discontinuation. We can't guarantee this for every case, but the salient point is that you must continue through all the required stages in defending the claim. 

You might also want to read Highview/DCB Legal and CP Plus/DCB Legal threads to find the same pattern is even more established. 

Common denominator - DCB Legal.

RedRobin88

Thanks @Umkomaas I have taken a look and good to know this is another step to watch out for. Do you know who is best to advise on my draft above? Not sure if I need to add anything/take anything out. Many thanks 

Le_Kirk

Defence looks OK and you can flesh out with the details at WS stage, although you seem to have written most of the WS as the defence!

RedRobin88

Hi, just preparing my email to send defence to ccbcaq@justice.gov.uk in the morning. I see in the thread by @KeithP it notes to include the solicitor email. I have searched other threads and wanted to check if the latest email for DCB Legal Ltd is still: Paul@dcblegal.co.uk? Thanks 

RedRobin88

Sorry also should have mentioned the defendant might be moving home soon. In MCOL I added the correspondence address they would like everything to be sent to. Do I need to add note this anywhere else? Perhaps in the email with defence?