UKPC - PCN for parking on double yellow lines

Coupon-mad

Coupon-mad said:

This will be easy.

The new statutory Code (temporarily stalled but it IS coming this year) also defines 'parking' as NOT INCLUDING PICKING UP OR DROPPING OFF PASSENGERS:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/private-parking-code-of-practice/private-parking-code-of-practice

2.19 parked/parking

"an instance of a vehicle being caused by the driver to remain stationary other than in the course of driving (excluding instances where the driver has stopped to enable passengers leave or enter the vehicle)".

Don't forget to include the above.

If this is a DCBLegal claim you only need to edit paragraphs 2, 3, and 4 of the defence posted recently by @Johny86

LekkerManLekker

Coupon-mad said:

Coupon-mad said:

This will be easy.

The new statutory Code (temporarily stalled but it IS coming this year) also defines 'parking' as NOT INCLUDING PICKING UP OR DROPPING OFF PASSENGERS:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/private-parking-code-of-practice/private-parking-code-of-practice

2.19 parked/parking

"an instance of a vehicle being caused by the driver to remain stationary other than in the course of driving (excluding instances where the driver has stopped to enable passengers leave or enter the vehicle)".

Don't forget to include the above.

If this is a DCBLegal claim you only need to edit paragraphs 2, 3, and 4 of the defence posted recently by @Johny86

Thanks

My defence will basically be

• I went to pick up my wife and 20 month daughter who were at the indoor play area (Adventure Kidz).
• I stopped on the yellow lines as parking was full.  I wasn't obstructing other vehicles.
• As it was raining, I had to take umbrellas to wife and daughter so they wouldn't get wet.
• Walked with them back car and we left.

Coupon-mad

So when you go to use Johny86's defence that I linked for you already, you will be replacing his 2, 3, 4 with:

2.  It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle on the material date. The Defendant went to pick up his wife and young daughter who were at the indoor play area (Adventure Kidz) as it was raining and the play session had ended.  On arrival, the side parking bays were full but there was plenty of space in the car park, and the Defendant was only there to pick up passengers.  As boarding or alighting is specifically allowed on double yellow lines (it is exempt activity as defined in the Highway Code and is not 'parking' and cannot result in any penalty on double yellow lines on street) the Defendant briefly stopped, without obstructing any person or vehicle, just for the time it took to collect his wife and child in the driving rain.

3.  The new statutory Code of Practice linked later in this defence (temporarily stalled but it is being reintroduced by the Government after an Impact Assessment in 2023 which will only address monetary issues, not other clauses) also defines 'parking' as not including picking up or setting down passengers.  In the statutory definitions, it says at 2.19 (parked/parking) that parking is "an instance of a vehicle being caused by the driver to remain stationary other than in the course of driving (excluding instances where the driver has stopped to enable passengers leave or enter the vehicle)".

4.  No signs were seen and having been back for a look, the Defendant avers that the prominence and legibility of any supposed parking terms is extremely poor at this location, even in good weather.  The only visible 'consumer notice' (Consumer Rights Act 2015 definition applies) was the provision of double yellow lines, the normal interpretation of which is to allow brief stops for exempt activity.  No fair consideration or grace period was allowed either, despite this being mandatory in the Claimant's Code of Practice.  The Defendant is unsure what the cause of action is, and what he is supposed to have done wrong, given that the Particulars are silent about the precise allegation, grace periods or any terms of the supposed 'contract'.

5 onwards (copy from the defence by Johny86)

LekkerManLekker

Coupon-mad said:

So when you go to use Johny86's defence that I linked for you already, you will be replacing his 2, 3, 4 with:

2.  It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle on the material date. The Defendant went to pick up his wife and young daughter who were at the indoor play area (Adventure Kidz) as it was raining and the play session had ended.  On arrival, the side parking bays were full but there was plenty of space in the car park, and the Defendant was only there to pick up passengers.  As boarding or alighting is specifically allowed on double yellow lines (it is exempt activity as defined in the Highway Code and is not 'parking' and cannot result in any penalty on double yellow lines on street) the Defendant briefly stopped, without obstructing any person or vehicle, just for the time it took to collect his wife and child in the driving rain.

3.  The new statutory Code of Practice linked later in this defence (temporarily stalled but it is being reintroduced by the Government after an Impact Assessment in 2023 which will only address monetary issues, not other clauses) also defines 'parking' as not including picking up or setting down passengers.  In the statutory definitions, it says at 2.19 (parked/parking) that parking is "an instance of a vehicle being caused by the driver to remain stationary other than in the course of driving (excluding instances where the driver has stopped to enable passengers leave or enter the vehicle)".

4.  No signs were seen and having been back for a look, the Defendant avers that the prominence and legibility of any supposed parking terms is extremely poor at this location, even in good weather.  The only visible 'consumer notice' (Consumer Rights Act 2015 definition applies) was the provision of double yellow lines, the normal interpretation of which is to allow brief stops for exempt activity.  No fair consideration or grace period was allowed either, despite this being mandatory in the Claimant's Code of Practice.  The Defendant is unsure what the cause of action is, and what he is supposed to have done wrong, given that the Particulars are silent about the precise allegation, grace periods or any terms of the supposed 'contract'.

5 onwards (copy from the defence by Johny86)

I wasn't expecting you to write it for me, but THANK YOU

Coupon-mad

Was in a good mood...going to Wembley...got my ticket, life's good!

LekkerManLekker

Coupon-mad said:

Was in a good mood...going to Wembley...got my ticket, life's good!

Who are you going to see?

I wished I had bought Depeche Mode tickets, but they are all sold out

Boat_to_Bolivia

CM's beloved Seagulls I imagine...

Coupon-mad

Clue: my avatar.

LekkerManLekker

Ah, I presume a Brighton supporter.  So it must be for the FA Cup semi-final on 23rd April?

Coupon-mad

It's well known by the regulars here that yep, I am a diehard Seagulls fan!