Beat them!

Fruitcake

PPC = Private Parking Company, the outfit who are taking you to court.

Yes, you must include signage as a defence point; it's crucial to your case.
If you can't read what they say from a nice clear photo' how on earth is a driver meant to read them from a moving car, or even when standing underneath and looking up at them. They are unreadable, and the charge for failing to comply is missing or so tiny it cannot be read without a magnifying glass.

The last picture you posted tells us it is a BPA member. The BPA requires it's members to have signage to a certain standard. The signs must prominently state the amount of the charge, and must have text in a readable font. Not doing so is a breach of the BPA's code of practice. 

I suggest you make para 3 about the fact that payment was made and a ticket displayed, and add a new para 4 that the signs did not show the charge for failing to comply with the terms and conditions, they typeface was too small to read, the signs inside the car park failed to show the DPA logo, all of which is a breach of the BPA's code of practice.

Don't forget to renumber subsequent paragraphs.

When did the alleged event occur, as that will determine which version of the BPA's CoP to use?

Sheildmaid

Ok thank you I will edit now and resend. Alleged offence was 8.7.21

Sheildmaid

Sorry but this photo it does say if you breach any of these term you will be charge £100?

Fruitcake

Only if you stand on a ladder and read it with a magnifying glass. The £100 charge should be in bold type, larger that the rest of the wording, and readable from a reasonable distance.

You absolutely must include the fact that,

4  The signage is inadequate and fails to comply with the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice version 8, and is at variance with the standards determined by the signage in the ParkingEye vs Beavis Supreme Court ruling. The charge is unreadable and not sufficiently brought to the attention of the motorist.

You can then expand on this at the witness statement/exhibits stage later in the process. It is your job to aver the above is true, and it is the claimant's job to disprove it. If you don't include it in your defence, you can't bring it up later, which is why it is so important to include it now.

I suggest you post your amended paras 2, 3, and new number 4, and remember to renumber everything afterwards.

Let a few more of the regulars comment, then submit it tomorrow around lunchtime, making sure you get an auto acknowledgment. Don't try to submit it outside working hours as it may not get there.

Mouse007

I think you have a winning case, don't add this to your defence, save it for later if need be. If Coupon-Mad however disagrees with me I will defer to her opinion.

The signs are clear, pay and display. There is no instruction to do anything else - I’ve looked at and zoomed in on all your photos. I can not read the small print, neither could you.

They have not supplied you with any photographic evidence showing you failed to pay and display. Just photo in and photo out (?).

It is always the case that the claimant must prove their claim, you are under no obligation to prove your defence if they fail to do that. Where is the photo of your car parked not displaying a valid ticket?

I and others on here may recognise that type of pay and display machine. Those usually require you to enter the vehicle registration number - but note there is no such instruction on the signs (terms and conditions) which can be read. I presume no mention of this condition has yet been made in their particulars of claim. So far all you have told us is they claim you failed to pay and display.

I think they are making this claim because they have no link between your ticket and your vehicle registration number which they only have from their ANPR camera. What they have failed to do is update the signs to reflect their needs.

You maintain you did pay and display, you remember doing so because you were surprised how cheap it was (that is a very strong point, I think this reason why you remember paying is compelling). They have no evidence otherwise and if they suddenly spring the registration number point - be ready to point to their signs and say, that was not a requirement.

I would be astonished if any judge would disagree.

Sheildmaid

Ok so it now reads 

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

3. The defendant distinctly remembers paying cash for this ticket and displaying said ticket in the wind screen. The photos on the PCN notice on claim merely show the car entering and leaving the car park, no proof of the claim of no payment has been given.

4.the signage is inadequate and fails to comply with the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice version 8 and is at variance with the standards determined by the signage in the ParkingEye vs Beavis Superme Court ruling. The charge is unreadable and not sufficiently brought to the attention of the motorist. 

Mouse007 I agree no picture of the car actually parked without ticket has been given. I suspect the same their computer system or whatever has failed to match my ticket to their cameras. 

Mouse007

Sheildmaid said:

Ok so it now reads 

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

3. The defendant distinctly remembers paying cash for this ticket and displaying said ticket in the wind screen. The photos on the PCN notice on claim merely show the car entering and leaving the car park, no proof of the claim of no payment has been given.

4.the signage is inadequate and fails to comply with the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice version 8 and is at variance with the standards determined by the signage in the ParkingEye vs Beavis Superme Court ruling. The charge is unreadable and not sufficiently brought to the attention of the motorist. 

Mouse007 I agree no picture of the car actually parked without ticket has been given. I suspect the same their computer system or whatever has failed to match my ticket to their cameras. 

Perfect, I hope others agree

KeithP

Maybe change the start of the second sentence of para 3 to...

The photos on the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) merely show...

Coupon-mad

And being really pedantic, 'windscreen' is one word. 

Good defence apart from that, once slotted into the template defence.

Make sure you re-read the first 12 steps in the first post of the Template Defence so you don't have to ask us about the next letters/DQ form.

Sheildmaid

Submitted defence and got email of receipt of claim. 

I also email it to
office@ce-service.co.uk
legal3@ce-service.co.uk

Thank you all so much 
keep you updated 💪