County court claim from UKPC

ColinMyer

Hi all,

Back in May '22 I got a letter from UKPC saying I'd got a PCN in a private car park 6 months before and I owed them some money. I thought it was a nonsense because I know I've never parked in the road - I *think* I once used the car park for turning around in (it's where my son's old nanny lived and so I used to go there for pick-ups and drop-offs only) anyway I (foolishly?) decided to ignore the letter and subsequent letters thinking they'd get bored. Now I have received the CC claim you see below. 

Unfortunately I only discovered this forum a few days ago and I did another foolish thing - I submitted a v brief defence saying 'the contravention did not occur' and disputing the assertion that I had 'agreed to pay' UKPC anything as they claim in the form below. 

Have I borked my chances of filing a proper defence or will I get a chance to update/enlarge?

Thanks in advance for answering!

Coupon-mad

I submitted a v brief defence saying 'the contravention did not occur' and disputing the assertion that I had 'agreed to pay' UKPC anything as they claim in the form below. 
Have I borked my chances of filing a proper defence...

Yes, sadly.

BUT DO NOT PAY.

CARRY ON.


THE BAD NEWS: 
You cannot change that awful defence (sorry!) unless you pay over £100 to the court to beg for permission to amend it (only free of charge if you are on a low income and qualify for help with fees).  It requires a formal application.

If we had a pound for every time people here think 'the driver agreed to pay and did not' means they actually 'agreed' (of course it doesn't mean that!) and that it is something to put in a dedence (it's not...) we'd be rich:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/79319584/#Comment_79319584

Literally every week we have to reply like that to field that schoolboy error of people getting over-excited about perfectly normal wording summing up how an alleged parking contract works.

Oh dear.  You can't even hang a sock on that point, let alone your hat!

or will I get a chance to update/enlarge?

Sort of, yes.


THE GOOD NEWS: 
There is WS & evidence stage before the hearing.  You can also cite the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and unclear signage because your 'defence' is essentially saying "there was no agreed contract" so it does at least buy you that v important argument.

And of course if this is DCBLegal they usually discontinue 'single PCN' cases regardless of facts, when they see a decent witness statement.

So you will probably still win.

And there's no risk as long as you NOW get 'on piste' and follow every single step of 'IMPORTANT: KNOW WHAT HAPPENS WHEN' from the NEWBIES thread (minus using the RobertCox WS example linked there, because that's out of date).

...and the other good news is that the Government has stepped in and the law is changing, and YOU CAN HELP CHANGE THE LAW.

Public Consultation coming very soon.

Umkomaas

And of course if this is DCBLegal they usually discontinue 'single PCN' cases regardless of facts, when they see a decent witness statement.

Re the above, I thought I'd draw your attention to this fairly recent thread which you might have not yet seen. You must keep going through all the necessary court procedure phases, but the hope is that your case will follow the same pattern as all those detailed in the thread. 

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

ColinMyer

Thank you both.

@Coupon-mad - yeah, I was aware 'you have agreed to pay' is standard wording. Agreed - I'm following the advice in that thread carefully from now on.

@Umkomaas - thank you - will have a read, thank you

ColinMyer

Hi all, I've finally received notification of allocation to the small claims track (i.e. the date and time of my hearing has been set). However, it's fair to say I'm really struggling to adapt the template baz417 shared here.

This is the current opening of my witness statement doc:

                                                 Witness Statement of Defendant

1. I am FULL NAME (Address: _________________) and I am the defendant against whom this claim is made. The facts below are true to the best of my belief and my account has been prepared based upon my own knowledge.

2. In my statement I shall refer to (Exhibits X-X) within the evidence supplied with this statement, referring to page and reference numbers where appropriate. 

3. In summary: I deny that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.  I deny that my conduct as the driver of my vehicle was in breach of any term. Further, it is denied that this Claimant (understood to have a bare licence as agents) 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 boilerplate text in the Particulars of Claim ('the POC').

Facts and Sequence of events

4. On the 20th of December 2021 I drove my __________, registration _________ to Xxxxx Xxxxx to drop my young son off at his childminder for the day.

5. On arrival at Upton Close I realised I had forgotten to bring my child’s cot with me and so I left the baby with his childminder, turned around in Upton Close and drove home again to collect it.

6. I then immediately returned to Upton Close, dropped off the cot, turned around in the road again, and went back home to XXXXXXXXXX Avenue.

[Note just for MSE forum: the evidence against me is two tightly cropped photos of the car taken half an hour apart)

7. I did not receive the letters attached here as Exhibits X and Y as I moved house in May 2021 and was somewhat dilatory about updating the DVLA regarding my change of address. When I did start receiving letters regarding the parking charge I assumed there must have been some kind of mistake because I’ve never parked in a bay in Upton Close (I drop off and pick-up at the kerb and only use the car park to turn around in) – as a result I ignored the letters.

8. Upon receiving the small claim in January 2023, I sent an email to the claimant requesting all the evidence they were relying upon for their claim as I was still certain I had never parked in Upton Close. In response they sent me the photos attached here as Exhibits J and Z. As may be seen these tightly cropped photos merely show my car being driven along an unknown road and have nothing whatsoever to do with parking.

9. On seeing the lack of evidence I decided to fight this unjust claim, however, due to being unfamiliar with the court system, I failed to submit a detailed defence shortly after acknowledging the claim – an oversight I’m sorry for (and am rectifying here). 

****After this I'm planning to include the following from Baz's template:

- Exaggerated Claim and 'market failure' currently examined by the Government

- CRA Breaches

- Conclusion

BUT I can't work out whether 'The Beavis case is against this claim' - especially part i, 'Concealed pitfall or trap' is relevant to me - and the same goes for the 'Observations of Claimant WS', and 'Defence' sections. 

Any help greatly appreciated!

Coupon-mad

Are you saying they've shown two visits as if it was one parking event?

If so, that is a major failing on their part, that kills their cause of action so you need to explain it, if that's what you mean?

Your exhibits are meant to be identified by your initials and a number, e.g.  CM1, CM2, etc.

Plus of course you need the three standard exhibits that is one oft the reasons that baz's WS bundle is an exemplar.

It is surely obvious which are the usual 3 exhibits out of his seven?   They are used every time. I don't really know why people are suddenly struggling with using his bundle and adapting it and seem to be missing the point of the standard 3 exhibits.

I'm pretty sure it says in his thread which of his exhibits are standard for people to copy.  So the three standard exhibits are simple to spot, aren't they?  I don't understand why people aren't using them...

Yes the Beavis case is relevant in EVERY case.

Yes you can make your own observations about your Claimant's WS and evidence - but obviously only if you receive it before the deadline to file & serve yours.

I would not exhibit two letters never received!  Remove this (below) and it's also irrelevant when you updated your V5C because a PPC can only ask the DVLA once, and it isn't given as a reliable 'address for service' anyway:

"I did not receive the letters attached here as Exhibits X and Y as I moved house in May 2021 and was somewhat dilatory about updating the DVLA regarding my change of address."

ColinMyer

Are you saying they've shown two visits as if it was one parking event?

Yes, this is what I think must have happened - although I don't have any evidence except for the claimant's enforcement images! If I leave this argument out (as it's speculation on my part) do you think I'll have enough to rely on?

Re: Baz's bundle I'll go back to Baz's thread - I obviously need to read it more carefully.

Coupon-mad

Why in earth would you leave the winning argument out? This is a double dip. Their bad.  

Even the DLUHC mention the phrase 'double dip' in the new statutory Code of Practice, because I told them about it and they listened.

ColinMyer

Hi all, good news - DCBL has discontinued court proceedings. They emailed me the notification last Thursday. Despite my terrible initial defence we won out. Thanks @Umkomaas and @Coupon-mad for your support.

Umkomaas

ColinMyer said:

Hi all, good news - DCBL has discontinued court proceedings. They emailed me the notification last Thursday. Despite my terrible initial defence we won out. Thanks @Umkomaas and @Coupon-mad for your support.

Thank you very much for your update.  I'll record your win in the DCB Legal discontinuations thread right now. Well done. 👍

Coupon-mad

ColinMyer said:

Hi all, good news - DCBL has discontinued court proceedings. They emailed me the notification last Thursday. Despite my terrible initial defence we won out. Thanks @Umkomaas and @Coupon-mad for your support.

Yay!  You won!

ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST!