County Court Business Centre UKPC

zingzinger

Hi all.
I received this summons and am about to submit my defence. Any input would be greatly appreciated.
Please see my defence below if any other info is needed please let me know. I hope my defence is written well enough that what happened is self-explanatory.

Im not sure what to do next

(Image removed by Forum Team)

Any help really really appreciated;

To Whom It May Concern:
I worked in the *** Street complex adjoining the aforementioned carpark. At the time entry to the carpark was accessed by a caretaker/security guard who had a key to the locked gate. The parking fine was issued on 28/02/2018 which was the peak/worst day of the “Beast from the East” weather.

The entirety of London was snowed in, and the transport was not running reliably. I walked 3 miles in treacherous snowed in weather from my house leaving my wife and children to the car park.

Upon my arrival, it was clear that the caretaker was not present for work that day as with the rest of the country’s workforce. This made it impossible to remove my car as he held the key to open the gates and drive out of the carpark. It was still possible to walk in and out of the carpark on foot but not drive due to the locked gates. I then made the trek back home on foot.
The following day when the snow had eased off a little I made the same trip on foot and the caretaker was there and I removed the car.

I was then shocked to find I received a fine from UKPC in the post some weeks later. I did some research and found their website and sent in an appeal explaining that the car park was locked and no way to drive out. They acknowledged my appeal (I have a record of the acknowledgement email) and replied that they would respond to it.

I never heard back from them and then perhaps 2 years later received letter from a different company asking for payment. I believed these letters to be a scam as they were from a different company name. To this day I have not heard back from UKPC concerning my appeal.

Finally this week this letter from the County Court Business Centre was sent.

Yours sincerely

Not_A_Hope

You should redact the MCOL password showing on that claim form. Otherwise someone might write some rubbish that will leave you up the creek.

What you have written is not a defence. Please read the Newbies thread and Template Defence.

After acknowledging the claim in a timely fashion on MCOL you draft a couple of brief paragraphs describIng what happened for comment on here. You should use terms such as the defendant not I etc. The finalised paragraphs will be inserted into the template before sending it via email to the CCBC

KeithP

With a Claim Issue Date of 12th September, you have until Monday 3rd October to file an Acknowledgment of Service. Do not file an Acknowledgment of Service before 17th September, but otherwise 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 17th October 2022 to file your Defence.

That's over 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'.

Le_Kirk

Not_A_Hope said:

What you have written is not a defence. Please read the Newbies thread and Template Defence.

I agree with @Not_A_Hope,  It is more like a Witness Statement (WS) See below for some generic help on defences and how to write them: -

A defence is a series of short punchy legal/technical arguments in the third person.  The arguments should be used to refute what is claimed in the POC.  Using the defence template, paragraph #1 is not edited, paragraph #2 states whether you are keeper and NOT the driver or keeper AND driver.  An own space defence is best defended as keeper and driver as you can then give an honest first person account in the witness statement.  A defence as "not driver" is best if  a) you weren't the driver and b) the PCN failed POFA.  Paragraph #3 is used to set the scene for the judge and explain that you deny not paying/overstaying/not displaying/not having a permit/not having a blue badge (or whatever the POC states) and, provided you have opened the door with those arguments, you can tell the whole story in the narrative that forms the witness statement along with the evidence that backs up the defence.  Just write section 3 in your own words and one of the regulars will critique it for you; resist the temptation to write War & Peace.

Fruitcake

What happened when you complained to the landowner and your MP? That is always Plan A, and it is never too late to action it.

zingzinger

Fruitcake said:

What happened when you complained to the landowner and your MP? That is always Plan A, and it is never too late to action it.

It was 5 years ago and I appealed and thought that was it....

Umkomaas

You definitely need to re-work that 'defence' (aka throw it it in the bin) and use the advice and template example contained in the Template Defence Announcement - just add your own circumstances to para 3 and renumber the remaining paras. 

If DCB Legal are involved, read the following thread, keep going through the required phases and your case too could feature in it!

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6377263/dcb-legal-record-of-private-parking-court-claim-discontinuations/p1

zingzinger

Hi, all (especially @Umkomaas ) thanks for the help is this ok for defence?

Many thanks

UK Parking Control Limited

(Claimant) 

- and -  

XXXX

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

 

3. The defendant had permission to park in the mentioned car park as a permit was issued. The defendant worked in the Walden Street complex adjoining the carpark. At the time entry to the carpark was accessed by a caretaker/security guard who had a key to the locked gate of the carpark. The parking fine was issued on 28/02/2018 which was the peak/worst day of the “Beast from the East” extreme weather.

On the date in question, the entirety of London was snowed in, and public transport was not running reliably. The defendant walked three miles in the very early morning through treacherous snowed in weather from his abode to recover his car leaving his wife and children at home.

Upon the defendant’s arrival, it was clear that the caretaker was not present for work that day as with the rest of the country’s workforce, the country had shut down. This made it impossible for any removal of the car as the security guard held the key to open the gates and drive out of the carpark.

It was possible to walk in and out of the carpark on foot but not drive due to the locked gates.
The following day when the snow had eased off the same trip on foot was made and the caretaker was present, and the car was removed. The caretaker apologised for not showing to work the day previous.
Some weeks later the defendant received a fine from UKPC. The defendant sought their website and sent in an appeal explaining that the car park was locked and no way to drive out due to the caretaker’s absence due to the weather. They acknowledged the defendants appeal (a record of the acknowledgement email exists) and UKPC replied that they would respond to it.

Subsequently the defendant never heard back from UKPC. Approximately 2 years later the defendant received letter from a different company asking for payment. The defendant believed these letters to be a scam as they were from a different company name. To the present day the defendant has not heard back from UKPC concerning the appeal.

 

4. The facts in this defence come from the Defendant's own knowledge and honest belief.  To pre-empt the usual template responses from this serial litigator: the court process is outside of the Defendant's life experience and they cannot be criticised for adapting some pre-written wording from a reliable advice resource. The Claimant is urged not to patronise the Defendant with (ironically template) unfounded accusations of not understanding their defence. 

Coupon-mad

It's not a fine so remove that word (I saw it twice).

Not sure why you haven't added 'and driver' to para 2 as the Template says to do.

And every paragraph of course needs a number, which means the template will need re-numbering accordingly (will be about 30 paragraphs).

Also this looks at first glance, a bit too long and detailed. I'd cut it down a bit and save the longer narrative for the later WS and evidence stage.

zingzinger

@Coupon-mad Thanks for your help

Is this better?

IN THE COUNTY COURT

Claim No.:  xxxxxx

Between

UK Parking Control Limited

(Claimant) 

- and -  

xxxx

 (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 the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in question.

 

3. The defendant had permission to park in the mentioned car park as a permit was issued. The defendant worked in the Walden Street complex adjoining the carpark. At the time, entry to the carpark was accessed by a caretaker/security guard who had a key to the locked gate of the carpark. The parking claim was issued on 28/02/2018 which was the peak/worst day of the “Beast from the East” extreme weather. On the date in question, it was clear that the caretaker was not present for work that day due to inclement weather. This made it impossible to remove the car as the security guard held the key to open the gates and drive out of the carpark. The following day the caretaker arrived to work, and the car was removed the caretaker apologised for not showing up to work the previous day.
Some weeks later the defendant received a claim from UKPC. The defendant sought their website and sent in an appeal explaining that the car park was locked and no way to drive out due to the caretaker’s absence due to the weather. They acknowledged the defendant's appeal (a record of the acknowledgement email exists) and UKPC replied that they would respond to it.
Subsequently, the defendant never heard back from UKPC. Approximately 2 years later the defendant received a letter from a different company asking for payment. The defendant believed these letters to be a scam as they were from a different company name. To the present day, the defendant has not heard back from UKPC concerning the appeal.

 

4. The facts in this defence come from the Defendant's own knowledge and honest belief.  To pre-empt the usual template responses from this serial litigator: the court process is outside of the Defendant's life experience and they cannot be criticised for adapting some pre-written wording from a reliable advice resource. The Claimant is urged not to patronise the Defendant with (ironically template) unfounded accusations of not understanding their defence. 

5. With regard to template statements, the Defendant observes after researching other parking claims, that the Particulars of Claim ('POC') set out a cut-and-paste incoherent statement of case.  Prior to this - and in breach of the pre-action protocol for 'Debt' Claims - no copy of the contract (sign) accompanied any Letter of Claim.  The POC is sparse on facts about the allegation which makes it difficult to respond in depth at this time; however the claim is unfair, objectionable, generic and inflated.  

Coupon-mad

Still needs an extra paragraph number!  Make it more readable for the Judge.

Changing fine to 'claim' is actually worse!