Civil Enforcement Claim form

Fruitcake

PoFA is irrelevant if you have admitted to being the driver.
You can compare the NTK with schedule 4 of the PoFA to see it was compliant, or you can post a copy of the NTK here for the regulars to check. Redact all personal data but leave the dates showing.

In your defence I wouldn't say that there was no entrance to a car park. Instead, I suggest you say that the address is part of a completely built-up area with no car park at that location. I wouldn't give a precise location of the car park either but that it is off another street entirely called Watts Road and perhaps say it is adjacent to a business called "XXX" or a private dwelling, whichever is the case.

Umkomaas

Use standard numbering for your paragraphs, not potentially confusing sub-numbering. 

Ed2022

Crikey everyone is either a night owl or up early.

See my post, this is the first letter that was allegedly sent. The date is 21/07/2018 and letter NTK 06/09/2018. No NTD and as @Fruitcake has said, comparing it to schedule 4 of PoFA. 
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6389130/pcn-with-county-court-n1-form-civil-enforcement-limited#latest

@C_Angel thank you and sorry just seen this. 

You did say "2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in question." So the PoFA wont then apply.

Also did you hear from the (1) Rex centre (2) your MP? I emailed the Rex Centre about their "cancel within 10-days", how can this be so if the NTK (with no prior NTD) was issues 45 days after the event? I suspect this is probably a revenue generating measure for the Rex Centre.

Coupon-mad

I'd remove 2.2 as it adds nothing to your case.

Change the word 'revoked' to 'meritless'.

And remove everything about ANPR not showing the car was parked because they don't have to show this, and you are admitting it was.

C_Angel

Thanks everyone for your comments. I will make the mentioned amends and upload a revised copy. Also I've been reviewing the SAR documents and there may be a slight problem with my appeals. So I was in a bad place at the time, and I let my mother appeal for me both times (big mistake I know). There are a couple of contradictions between both appeals that they might pick up on, so now I'm concerned. 

C_Angel

In the first appeal she mentioned I was "so unaware that I needed to get a ticket if I was sitting in the car, if I had of realized I would have definitely got a ticket". 

In the second appeal she said "I was breastfeeding my baby and couldn't get out of the car to get a ticket as I stated in my first appeal". The second appeal makes no mention of the fact that I was unaware it was a pay and display. 

Help. I don't have a good feeling about this court case.

C_Angel

On the 2 appeals they rejected but said they would accept the reduced amount of £60.

C_Angel

the original NTK

Coupon-mad

Just state in your WS that the Defendant suffers with her mental health and both appeals to the Claimant were actually put in by her mother for her, but in any event the fact that the Defendant was effectively being charged a penalty for breastfeeding (and as a result, could not possibly have seen any signs from the car) was ignored.  This is exactly the sort of issue that ANPR car park operators miss by offering their cheap camera system free of charge to landowners.  Leaving a car park unmanned means discrimination and harassment of protected persons will happen (ANPR doesn't even record blue badges, let alone breastfeeding mothers, or any other drivers whose reason to stop in a safe place is due to a minor vicissitude and who could not be deemed to have accepted a contract on unseen signs where the £100 penalty clause is far from prominent. Even more reason in ANPR car parks, for the signs and terms to be large and conspicuous with the £100 risk unmissable (ref Lord Denning's well known 'Red Hand Rule'), which was not the case here.

C_Angel

Ed2022 said:

Crikey everyone is either a night owl or up early.

See my post, this is the first letter that was allegedly sent. The date is 21/07/2018 and letter NTK 06/09/2018. No NTD and as @Fruitcake has said, comparing it to schedule 4 of PoFA. 
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6389130/pcn-with-county-court-n1-form-civil-enforcement-limited#latest

@C_Angel thank you and sorry just seen this. 

You did say "2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in question." So the PoFA wont then apply.

Also did you hear from the (1) Rex centre (2) your MP? I emailed the Rex Centre about their "cancel within 10-days", how can this be so if the NTK (with no prior NTD) was issues 45 days after the event? I suspect this is probably a revenue generating measure for the Rex Centre.

I did not hear anything back the REX centre and I didn't email my MP, I thought I am too late to do that. And you're very right about the 10 day cancellation period, its made up if you ask me.