County Court Defence I Park Services Overstay

Saj_1982

I received Country Court claim for a parking charge issued last year. With the help of this forum I have completed AOS and have prepared defence for this claim. I hope experienced users would have a look and suggest any changes if needed.

Parking charge was issued when I parked my car for 1 hour at went to the High Steet with my child however during shopping he got sick and I couldn't come back to extend the time. As soon as he got better I came back and extended the time for 2 more hours. We then left the parking within 1 hour. This effectively means that I have paid for 3 hours of parking however there was gap of 12 minutes between the 2 payments.

I didn't receive parking charge from I Park Services however I received many letters from their solicitor with threats of court proceedings. I couldn't get a satisfactory response from the premises when complained about this charge, it was strange as I often park there.

As Newbies thread suggests to get an SAR from the company by emailing and not sending a letter. However I couldn't find their email address anywhere on the website, there is only a contact from and postal address in the Privacy section. Should I send a letter with recorded delivery to get the SAR.

The following is the defence I put together:

1. 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 gave rise to a ‘parking charge’ and it is denied that this Claimant (understood to have a bare licence as managers) has standing to sue or to form contracts in their own name at the location.

The facts as known to the Defendant:

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

3. At the time of the alleged offence, the defendant was visiting B&M located on high street with his young kid. The defendant paid for 1 hour parking believing that this time should be enough however his child got sick and while attending to his child, the defendant got delayed. However, he came back to the parking and paid for another 2 hours as soon as his child got a bit better. It is to be noted that the defendant then left the parking in about an hour. This clarifies that the defendant paid for the complete stay at the parking and therefore invalidate this unjustified claim.

The rest is as stated in the Newbies thread

Fruitcake

It is not an offence, so don't use that word.

Add that the whole period of parking was paid for therefore there was no breach of Ts and Cs.
Check the signage to see if there is any stipulation on how long a motorist has to add/pay for additional time. If there is no such contract term, then there can have been no breach of contract.

If this was an ANPR monitored car park, note that this only records time on site, not parking time nor grace/consideration periods which have not been taken into account, breaching the PPC's ATA's CoP.

Quote the judge's comments from the Jopson v Homeguard caser where he said attending to a vicissitude of some small duration is not parking.
You should suggest that dealing with a sick child (don't say kid) would constitute a vicissitude of short duration. State that this was an appeal case and therefore is persuasive on the lower courts.
Case number was B9GF0A9E, and the transcript is available online. Quote the judge's name and precise words (around paras 19 or 20, and what he said were examples of small vicissitudes).

B789

As a matter of interest, what is the "Issue date" of the claim and on what date did you file your AoS? Also, which PPC and are they using a solicitor or did they file the claim themselves?

Coupon-mad

Which solicitor?

Don't use colloquialisms like 'kid' in a defence.

Le_Kirk

The usual place to look for a Data Protection Officer (DPO) is on the privacy page of the PPC.  I park services do not seem to have a DPO - try complaining to the ICO - instead you have to write to: -

Privacy Team,
I Park Services Ltd,
PO Box 90, Cockermouth, CA13 3BA
How quaint and old fashioned!

Saj_1982

B789 said:

As a matter of interest, what is the "Issue date" of the claim and on what date did you file your AoS? Also, which PPC and are they using a solicitor or did they file the claim themselves?

Issue date of claim: 25 April 2023
Filing Date of AoS: 28 April 2023
PPC: I Park Services Ltd
Solicitor: DCB Legal Ltd

Saj_1982

Coupon-mad said:

Which solicitor?

Don't use colloquialisms like 'kid' in a defence.

Thanks for the correction, will update accordingly
Solicitor: DCB Legal Ltd

Coupon-mad

Then use & adapt the defence by @Johny86 as it has extra DCBLegal-specific paragraphs.

KeithP

Saj_1982 said:

B789 said:

As a matter of interest, what is the "Issue date" of the claim and on what date did you file your AoS? Also, which PPC and are they using a solicitor or did they file the claim themselves?

Issue date of claim: 25 April 2023
Filing Date of AoS: 28 April 2023

With a Claim Issue Date of 25th April, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service on 28th April, you have until 4pm on Friday 26th May 2023 to file your Defence.

That's over two 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 at the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Don't miss the deadline 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'.

1505grandad

A heads-up  -  as you are admitting being the driver do not include the para 4 in Johny86 defence re PoFA

Saj_1982

Fruitcake said:

It is not an offence, so don't use that word.

Add that the whole period of parking was paid for therefore there was no breach of Ts and Cs.
Check the signage to see if there is any stipulation on how long a motorist has to add/pay for additional time. If there is no such contract term, then there can have been no breach of contract.

If this was an ANPR monitored car park, note that this only records time on site, not parking time nor grace/consideration periods which have not been taken into account, breaching the PPC's ATA's CoP.

Quote the judge's comments from the Jopson v Homeguard caser where he said attending to a vicissitude of some small duration is not parking.
You should suggest that dealing with a sick child (don't say kid) would constitute a vicissitude of short duration. State that this was an appeal case and therefore is persuasive on the lower courts.
Case number was B9GF0A9E, and the transcript is available online. Quote the judge's name and precise words (around paras 19 or 20, and what he said were examples of small vicissitudes).

I appreciate your detailed and helpful advice, will update the defence accordingly. Signs in the parking area are a bit high however I will visit the premises to check any terms about extension of time and take pictures for evidence.

There are cameras at entrance/exit of the car park so I believe they use ANPR, however you have to pay and display parking tickets as well.