DBC Legal / UKPC Limited County Court Business Centre

Mouse007

KeithP said:

If you were to go through the motions of filing an AoS now, it will not be recorded until Monday anyway.

That's a fair point - I should look a calendars more often, I never know what day of the week it is

sc0tt8

Hello all, AoS issued, defence as below... 

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. (I was in a company car and pretty sure I have admitted to being the registered keeper previously) 

3. The defendant used the car park at Curzon Street, Birmingham for practically each working day for a period of over 12 months due to working on a construction site project on Curzon Street for Birmingham City University. The date of the alleged parking event claimed by UK Parking Control Limited was 8 June 2017 and the defendant does not know the details of the alleged offence as they have not had any specific letters from the claimant. (From memory I have disputed two PCNs with UKPCL at Curzon street in the past, one where the permit slipped off the dash and one which was back to front.. I don't recall having three PCNs from them so I have just said 'i don't know the details' will this suffice? )

Le_Kirk

Can we assume that you will not be submitting the defence until you remove the words in brackets?  You haven't given the judge any reason why you were permitted to park there, for example, VRM on a white list, permit given etc.

sc0tt8

Yes I'll remove the brackets before hand. 

VRM on a white list? 

I guess permit was given as I would've had a valid permit / ticket to park? 

Le_Kirk

VRM = Vehicle Registration Mark (number plate).  Where people park regularly, for example as contractors on a building site, the main contractor would issue a list (white) of all the cars and their VRMs that are authorised as opposed to a list (black) where they are not authorised to park.
If a permit was given, you could say you were de facto authorised to park there whether or not the permit was displayed.  You need to give the judge some facts upon which he/she can base a decision.

sc0tt8

Hi Le_Kirk thanks for this...

Ah sorry I misunderstood.. no I didn't have a white list. I chose to use that site for the convenience to where I was working. 

And again I misinterpreted.. I didn't have a permit. I literally would've paid and displayed. I have taken out the details that aren't really relevant as I'm unsure what the alleged offence relates to without further proof from the claimant. I've amended 3 below if this would work? 

3. The date of the alleged parking event claimed by UK Parking Control Limited was 8 June 2017 and the defendant does not know the details of the alleged offence as they have not had any specific letters from the claimant substantiating.


I mentioned above there was two occasions that I got a PCN from UKPCL one where my ticket slipped off the dash and one where the ticket was upside down but I don't know what this claim is for so best to just say I don't know the details right?

Le_Kirk

sc0tt8 said:

Hi Le_Kirk thanks for this...

I mentioned above there was two occasions that I got a PCN from UKPCL one where my ticket slipped off the dash and one where the ticket was upside down but I don't know what this claim is for so best to just say I don't know the details right?

The well known "fluttering ticket" syndrome.  Check the forum by searching for the word fluttering ticket. there are plenty of examples on the forum and they have been defended and won!  Just because the ticket cannot be seen doesn't mean you didn't pay.  Was it a PDT where you had to input your VRM before buying the ticket?  If so, you could, in your defence, use that as proof that you paid and put them to strict proof that they checked their PDT logs for your VRM before issuing the PCN.

sc0tt8

Le_Kirk said:

sc0tt8 said:

Hi Le_Kirk thanks for this...

I mentioned above there was two occasions that I got a PCN from UKPCL one where my ticket slipped off the dash and one where the ticket was upside down but I don't know what this claim is for so best to just say I don't know the details right?

The well known "fluttering ticket" syndrome.  Check the forum by searching for the word fluttering ticket. there are plenty of examples on the forum and they have been defended and won!  Just because the ticket cannot be seen doesn't mean you didn't pay.  Was it a PDT where you had to input your VRM before buying the ticket?  If so, you could, in your defence, use that as proof that you paid and put them to strict proof that they checked their PDT logs for your VRM before issuing the PCN.

No it was quite an old PDT where you didn't have to put in VRM so can't use that one.. but yes I'll have a look regarding fluttering ticket... Thanks again Le_Kirk 👍

Coupon-mad

I agree.

You do need to state that the Defendant always paid and displayed on every visit. Whilst this claim is absent of any details to shed light on the alleged breach, the Defendant believes the paid ticket would have been visible to the parking operative and can vaguely recollect disputing a parking charge re this site where carefully-angled photos by this Claimant had unfairly made it appear that there was no paid ticket visible for inspection. If this was the issue then there was no breach and this case should never have reached court.

sc0tt8

Thank you guys again 🙏. So change of fact 3 as below please let me know your thoughts:

3. The defendant used the car park at Curzon Street, Birmingham for practically each working day for a period of over 12 months due to working on a construction project on Curzon Street for Birmingham City University. The Defendant always purchased a ticket from the Pay and Display machine. The machine would only accept pound coins as payment so apart from keeping each individual ticket there are no others reasonable means to prove this. The date of the alleged parking event was 8 June 2017 and the Defendant does not know the details of the alleged offence as they have not had any specific letters from the Claimant substantiating.

Whilst this claim is absent of any details to shed light on the alleged breach, the Defendant believes the paid ticket would have been visible to the parking operative and can vaguely recollect disputing a parking charge regarding this site where carefully-angled photos by the Claimant had unfairly made it appear that there was no paid ticket visible for inspection. If this was the issue then there was no breach and this case should never have reached court.