IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including QR codes, number plates and reference numbers.

County Court Claim - UK Parking Control Limited/DCB Legal

13»

Comments

  • berseker
    berseker Posts: 80
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Forumite

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

    3. 

    3.1. In June 2018 the car park was full, so the defendant parked the car on the unmarked roadway leading into the car park for a very short period.

    3.2. There were no visible signs at the entrance/exit of the road to suggest any parking restrictions. Nor were there any road markings on the side of the road where the defendant parked to say that parking is prohibited or there are restrictions. Where the defendant parked caused no obstruction to other vehicles entering and exiting the car park.

    3.3. The claimant's lack of signage at the entrance/exit of the road and the positioning of the very few signs in other locations must be questioned. The signage is placed at such heights that they are not visible whilst driving. This is because the level is above the height of the defendant's car roof. Even on foot, they are not clear in what they read.

    3.4. Even if the signage was at the correct height and had larger and clearer writing, they are not forward facing in the direction of travel on the road, therefore the defendant did not enter any contract and was not bound by any contractual terms.

    3.5. When the Defendant returned to the vehicle, there was no ticket on the windscreen, so the defendant would have had no recollection of this ticket.

     3.6. BPA and IPC say parking operators should give drivers a 10-minute grace period before issuing a parking charge notice. The time stamp on the pictures of the pcn and the time when the ticket was issued are all within 3 minutes of each other.

    4. The Defendant avers that the Claimant failed to serve a Notice to Keeper compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Consequently, the claimant cannot transfer liability for this charge to the Defendant as keeper of the vehicle. 

    5. The Particulars of Claim ('POC') appear to be in breach of CPR 16.4, 16PD3 and 16PD7, and fail to "state all facts necessary for the purpose of formulating a complete cause of action”. 

    6. The Defendant is unable, on the basis of the POC, to understand with certainty what case is being pursued. 

    7. The POC are entirely inadequate, in that they fail to particularise (a) the contractual term(s) relied upon; (b) the specifics of any alleged breach of contract; and (c) how the purported and unspecified 'damages' arose and the breakdown of the exaggerated quantum. 

    8. The claim has been issued via Money Claims Online and, as a result, is subject to a character limit for the Particulars of Claim section of the Claim Form.  The fact that generic wording appears to have been applied has obstructed any semblance of clarity.  The Defendant trusts that the court will agree that a claim pleaded in such generic terms lacks the required details and requires proper particularisation in a detailed document within 14 days, per 16PD.3 

    9. The guidance for completing Money Claims Online confirms this and clearly states: "If you do not have enough space to explain your claim online and you need to serve extra, more detailed particulars on the defendant, tick the box that appears after the statement 'you may also send detailed particulars direct to the defendant.'" 

    10. No further particulars have been filed and to the Defendant's knowledge, no application asking the court service for more time to serve and/or relief from sanctions has been filed either. 

    11. In view of it having been entirely within the Claimant's Solicitors' gift to properly plead the claim at the outset and the claim being for a sum, well within the small claims limit, such that the Defendant considers it disproportionate and at odds with the overriding objective (in the context of a failure by the Claimant to properly comply with rules and practice directions) for a Judge to throw the erring Claimant a lifeline by ordering further particulars (to which a further defence might be filed, followed by further referral to a Judge for directions and allocation) the court is respectfully invited to strike this claim out. 

  • berseker
    berseker Posts: 80
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Forumite
    Is the above ok? Also, I will add the generic point 12 to 35 to my defence.

    I'm not sure whether it's worth mentioning, but I sent a SAR request email to both DCB legal and UKPC at the same time. UKPC sent the SAR details within a few days, whereas someone from DCB sent an e-mail stating that they have requested it from the relevant department and it will be sent to me in due course (was not a generic e-mail). It's nearly been a month and I have not yet received the SAR as requested. Should I mention this?

    Thanks
  • Fruitcake
    Fruitcake Posts: 58,155
    Name Dropper Photogenic First Anniversary First Post
    Forumite
    DCBL have 30 days to response, but I doubt anything you receive will be of any more use than the info from UKPC which is why we normally only recommend that an SAR is sent to the PPC.
    If they fail to response within 30 days then send them a reminder giving them seven days to respond. If they fail to comply then report them to the ICO.
    I married my cousin. I had to...
    I don't have a sister. :D
    All my screwdrivers are cordless.
    "You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks
  • Fruitcake
    Fruitcake Posts: 58,155
    Name Dropper Photogenic First Anniversary First Post
    Forumite
    Personally I would ditch 3.1, remove "Even if the signage was at the correct height and had larger and clearer writing" from 3.4 and instead state that the signs are unreadable and fail to meet the requirements of the BPA CoP. Quote the relevant part of the CoP.

    Quote the relevant part of the CoP about grace periods in 3.6.

    4 is irrelevant since you have identified yourself as the driver.
    I married my cousin. I had to...
    I don't have a sister. :D
    All my screwdrivers are cordless.
    "You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks
  • berseker
    berseker Posts: 80
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Forumite

    @Fruitcake Thanks for your swift response and help. I have made the relevant adjustments. I will dig through the bpa cop and get the exact quote for the grace period and add it in. Thanks


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

    3. 

    3.1. There were no visible signs at the entrance/exit of the road to suggest any parking restrictions. Nor were there any road markings on the side of the road where the defendant parked to say that parking is prohibited or there are restrictions. Where the defendant parked caused no obstruction to other vehicles entering and exiting the car park.

    3.2. The claimant's lack of signage at the entrance/exit of the road and the positioning of the very few signs in other locations must be questioned. The signage is placed at such heights that they are not visible whilst driving. This is because the level is above the height of the defendant's car roof. Even on foot, they are not clear in what they read.

    3.3.  The signs are unreadable, they are not forward facing in the direction of travel on the road, therefore the defendant did not enter any contract and was not bound by any contractual terms. With all of this said, the signs fail to meet the requirements of the BPA code of practice.

    3.4. When the Defendant returned to the vehicle, there was no ticket on the windscreen, so the defendant would have had no recollection of this ticket.

     3.5. BPA and IPC say parking operators should give drivers a 10-minute grace period before issuing a parking charge notice. The time stamp on the pictures of the pcn and the time when the ticket was issued are all within 3 minutes of each other.

    4. The Particulars of Claim ('POC') appear to be in breach of CPR 16.4, 16PD3 and 16PD7, and fail to "state all facts necessary for the purpose of formulating a complete cause of action”. 

    5. The Defendant is unable, on the basis of the POC, to understand with certainty what case is being pursued. 

    6. The POC are entirely inadequate, in that they fail to particularise (a) the contractual term(s) relied upon; (b) the specifics of any alleged breach of contract; and (c) how the purported and unspecified 'damages' arose and the breakdown of the exaggerated quantum. 

    7. The claim has been issued via Money Claims Online and, as a result, is subject to a character limit for the Particulars of Claim section of the Claim Form.  The fact that generic wording appears to have been applied has obstructed any semblance of clarity.  The Defendant trusts that the court will agree that a claim pleaded in such generic terms lacks the required details and requires proper particularisation in a detailed document within 14 days, per 16PD.3 

    8. The guidance for completing Money Claims Online confirms this and clearly states: "If you do not have enough space to explain your claim online and you need to serve extra, more detailed particulars on the defendant, tick the box that appears after the statement 'you may also send detailed particulars direct to the defendant.'" 

    9. No further particulars have been filed and to the Defendant's knowledge, no application asking the court service for more time to serve and/or relief from sanctions has been filed either. 

    10. In view of it having been entirely within the Claimant's Solicitors' gift to properly plead the claim at the outset and the claim being for a sum, well within the small claims limit, such that the Defendant considers it disproportionate and at odds with the overriding objective (in the context of a failure by the Claimant to properly comply with rules and practice directions) for a Judge to throw the erring Claimant a lifeline by ordering further particulars (to which a further defence might be filed, followed by further referral to a Judge for directions and allocation) the court is respectfully invited to strike this claim out. 

  • Coupon-mad
    Coupon-mad Posts: 130,634
    Name Dropper First Post Photogenic First Anniversary
    Forumite
    That's perfect.
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
    CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
    Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
  • berseker
    berseker Posts: 80
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Forumite
    @Coupon-mad Perfect, I'll get that all put into one document and sent tonight. If I remember correctly I send my defence to ccbcaq@justice.gov.uk. Do I need to send the claimant a copy of my defence as well or just ccbc? Thank you guys and this community once again. Have a lovely weekend. God bless.
  • KeithP
    KeithP Posts: 37,432
    Name Dropper First Post First Anniversary
    Forumite
    berseker said:
    @Coupon-mad Perfect, I'll get that all put into one document and sent tonight. If I remember correctly I send my defence to ccbcaq@justice.gov.uk. Do I need to send the claimant a copy of my defence as well or just ccbc? Thank you guys and this community once again. Have a lovely weekend. God bless.
    If you do file your Defence tonight, make sure you get an email receipt in return. We have seen the CCBC apparently 'losing' Defences filed at the weekend leading to a Default Judgment.
    No need to send a copy to the Claimant, but it does no harm.
    And yes, you have got the right CCBC email address.
  • berseker
    berseker Posts: 80
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Forumite
    The defence has been sent and I have received an automated email receipt, thanks for the heads up @KeithP.

    I'll be sure to keep you all updated on what happens next. 

    Thank you all once again :)
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 342.5K Banking & Borrowing
  • 249.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.4K Spending & Discounts
  • 234.6K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 607.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 172.8K Life & Family
  • 247.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.8K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards