UKPC County court claim form for abandoning site.

Bebhsgr

After 5 and a half years of letters and harassment, DCBL now sent me a county court claim for an extortionate amount  - originally was 160 pounds. 
So i have read all your post on here and started an AOS today - 7 days from issuance.
I would like some help and guidance with the defence and  the witness statement - hopefully it wont reach court but i am determined to take it to the end.
I also attach photos of the SAR released by UKPC and all you can see is my car locked and parked !! How this is proving i abandoned the site ?
My main line of defence is that i stayed within the premises and they haven't provided any evidence of the contrary. The signs were nowhere around my vehicle parking bay but the closest was 10 meters behind on a considerate height with terms and conditions in yellow background and small fonts . And that the alleged site is not defined anywhere by wording or a map on any sign whatsoever. Google Maps shows boundaries including a road outside and part of the park nearby for the same postcode ! Would all these stand in a court and do i have chances winning this ?

Fruitcake

Plan A is still a complaint to the landowner and your MP.

Did you appeal the NTK originally?

Anyway, use the template defence and modify only paragraphs 2 and 3.

I think you should admit to being the keeper and driver in para 2.

If you can remember that you definitely did not leave site that day, then say so and put the claimant to strict proof that the contrary is true. If you can't remember what happened on an unremarkable day 5 1/2 years ago, then say so.

The PoC are vague and do not specify the reason for issuing the claim.

Get photos of the site and signage if possible, and use Google Streetview to see if there are any historical images that might help.

UKPC signs are always inadequate and the charge for breaching Ts and Cs is always in tiny font and cannot be read.
I bet there is was no map or description defining the site boundary meaning it would be impossible for a driver to know if they did or did not leave the site.

Bebhsgr

I did not appeal the original PCN back in 2017 as the common advice I had found online was to ignore those letters . I would only use the parking facilities to visit cineworld and mc Donald's in the complex but unsure which was on the day . I have not left the premises . I have moved to another area North now and I cannot revisit the site to get photos . There is a close up of the sign on Google I have found , but their photos anyway are crap and low resolution . Can you relu in the ones they provided ?  As you can see where I parked there are hardly any signs in front and side of these bays. I have sent an email to Cineworld they replied they cannot look into their databases to provide me some proof of attendance as I was a member with them and to take it with Crawley Leisure park . I will write a letter to my MP as well . 

KeithP

With a Claim Issue Date of 13th February, you have until Monday 6th March to file an Acknowledgment of Service but 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 20th March 2023 to file your Defence.

That's 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 guidance.

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'.

Coupon-mad

This will be easy.  They have no evidence.  See it through and they'll discontinue.

Fruitcake

The common advice elsewhere might have been to ignore a PCN in 2017, but it has not been recommended here since the law changed in 2012.

Plan A is still a complaint to the landowner and your MP, but you should still proceed with your defence as already advised unless/until the claim is discontinued. Unfortunately without a landowner cancellation this might not be unto a couple of weeks before the hearing day way off in the future, so you will still have to go through the motions.

I couldn't find any GSV images earlier than 2018, but in any case you are better using the ones provided to you by UKPC because they are always blurred and unreadable.

Bebhsgr

Thank you all for taking the time to reply and help me with this .
I have tried to find information about Crawley Leisure Park , but on their website when i select contact us it goes to an error - the page does not exist.
Also to write to my MP and say that i have been vindicated by a parking company that unlawfully claiming money and their threatening tactics - I am more than happy to do that - Could you suggest any template for that ?

i hereby attach the first sections of the defence - everything else is a copy - paste from Coupon-mad's post 

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. Liability is denied, whether or not the Claimant is claiming 'keeper liability', which is unclear from the Particulars.

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

3. To the Defendant’s understanding parking was free for all visitors of the complex and whilst on the premises his vehicle was left unattended and locked. On 16 /08/2017 in the afternoon hours the Defendant visited Crawley leisure park - as he had done numerous times before without issues - Due to been over 5 years he is unaware which venues he attended but he remained within the premises. The Defendant was shocked to have received notice of a P.C.N .The Claimant falsely claims that the Defendant abandoned the site, without providing any evidence of the above claim.

4. The Defendant avers that the operator’s signs, were not readily available throughout the area controlled by the Claimant - especially around his vehicle - and the existing ones were on a considerate height on columns way behind the parking bay used at 10 meters. The print on the signs is in small letters and particularly where it mentions leaving the site is small black print on yellow background. The Defendant could not read parts of the sign due to the fluorescent yellow background but also the small characters from the height the sign was positioned. The Defendant did not find a map displaying the boundaries or any description of the alleged ‘site’ anywhere on the premises or these signs. It all makes no sense to the Defendant . The area controlled by the Claimant is an open access area without barriers and without Pay and Display machines.

Accordingly it is denied that:

4.1  there was any agreement as between the Defendant and the Claimant

4.2  there was a clear definition of the site or boundaries the Defendant had to stay within
4.3  the Claimant has suffered loss or damage or that there is a lawful basis to pursue a claim for loss.

 

 

 

 

 

5. 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 Defendant's first language is not English .The Claimant is urged not to patronise the Defendant with (ironically template) unfounded accusations of not understanding their defence. 

--- I added paragraph 5 as i am unsure if i should leave that (ironically template) or should replace it with something and also if it's worthwhile mentioning English is not my primary language - I am trying to navigate through legal terms and not caught up by my lack of the right choice of wording .

Please any suggestions would be greatly appreciated - If i need to add something else in my defence from the template please also let me know.

patient_dream

This is just another 2017 UKPC utter crap claim.  

The "driver leaving site" is just one of the stupid wheezes of UKPC. THEY HAVE NOT PROVIDED ANY PROOF

UKPC SIGNS are unreadable rubbish

DCBL take on these rubbish UKPC claims wasting your time and the courts time ..... they end up being discontinued by DCBL but not until they have tried to milk you of your money

THE CLAIM signed by the infamous Yasmin Mia .....

1: There never was a parking charge of £160 ... it was £100
That is a lie and a feeble attempt of double recovery which the courts do not allow
2: The sign does NOT mention damages .... that is a fabrication and that means a feeble attempt of DOUBLE DOUBLE RECOVERY ?

If DCBL are looking for a court spanking whereby you can claim your costs then they are on the right track

Look at this thread ....... All to do with DCBL with the majority being UKPC pathetic claims

DCB LEGAL RECORD OF PRIVATE PARKING COURT CLAIM DISCONTINUATIONS

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

Coupon-mad

Vindicated doesn't mean victimised.  Wrong word.

No templates exist of course, it would be ineffective if there was a 'MP complaints' template.

Fruitcake

Combine paras 3 and 4 to make them one paragraph. There is too much unnecessary detail there that would be better used at the witness statement stage much later in the process.
You don't need 4.1, and 4.3 no longer applies. 4.2 doesn't need it's own numbering, but the sentence does need to be included in your para 3.

Your para 5 is fine as you have amended it, just make sure the paragraph numbering is correct.

The_Slithy_Tove

You need to familiarise yourself with VCS vs Ibbotson. Even though it's 11 years ago, nothing has materially changed since then regarding the points that Judge McIlwaine made, and the threats he made to the Claimant's solicitor about the merits of the case. The transcript it available on Pepipoo (possibly elsewhere). I would link to it, but I don't think MSE likes us linking to there.