PCN at my place of residence in 2017!

NGSomebody

Good evening. I am hopeful to get some help with this. I appreciate your time.
After following and adapting the template, I am about to hand-deliver my Defence at the Romford High Court against a 26 June 2023 deadline. Below are my Witness Statement and Defence, pls take a look and see if there is anything that I need to adjust/emphasize. Hopefully, the WS also gives you the story behind my 'parking' ordeal.
A) I intend to print this and the Defence, sign both, and deliver both ASAP. I hope the WS can go in at the same time.
I intend to add my cost at the end of the WS

Thank you.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

WS

1. I am the Defendant against whom this claim is made.

2. I resided at XXX, where the purported parking event took place. This address is a maisonette, situated in a block of flats with parking spaces both in front of the shops as well as the back of the building.

3. Located right next to the XXX Underground Station and right from the start of my tenancy at the address, there had always been “No Parking – Private Land” signs positioned around the space to discourage non-tenants from parking their vehicles before going on the train.

4. I had lived at this address since December 2014, and had always parked my vehicle in the (then unmarked) space behind the block.

5. Tenants had never been restricted from parking their vehicles at the address. Indeed, part of the selling points by the then property agents had always included ample parking space as well as proximity to the train station. No change to this right to park the vehicle where I lived was communicated by the landlord.

6. On 08/02/2017, the vehicle was SORN’ed as it had developed a timing belt problem. It was then kept in the compound while a plan to fix it was being put in place, only delayed by the availability of money.

7. In June 2017, I returned from work to find parking restriction signs bearing the ‘Spring Parking’ logo installed at the location. No communication came from our landlord.

8. In July, the SORN’ed car was ticketed with the following PCN numbers – 30XXX and 30XXX. I quickly got in contact with the issuer - Spring Parking, who insisted they were instructed by the landlord. They then also announced that the restrictions indicated on the signs were also targeted at tenants. Faced with a possible abdication of their contractual responsibility, I contacted the landlord who then also shockingly announced that tenants were now also targeted by the restrictions.

9. I continued to seek legality and reason with the landlord and Claimant, stating why the approach to abruptly deny tenants’ pre-existing car parking rights was inappropriate, while also trying to persuade the landlord to do the right thing. I anxiously tried to convince the Claimant of the need to recognize the primacy of the contract in a property I had lived in for just under three years and hold action until I (and other tenants) reach an agreement with the landlord.

10. On 19/08/2017, the Claimant cancelled both tickets. I was grateful and hopeful that the matter was arriving at a fair and just conclusion for tenants.

11. On 24/11/2017, the car was stolen from the (by then gated) compound along with two other cars. I promptly reported the theft to the police after having contacted the Claimant and landlord about its whereabouts, to no success. While the Claimant denied taking the car, they never mentioned they had issued a ticket on the car only two days earlier, as is known now.

12. In October 2022, I was shocked to see a debt notification added to my credit file after having moved to a new address. I also then found out the particulars of the issue through the County Court Business Centre – a claim made by Spring Parking on the very car I lost almost five years earlier! The following PCN details were gleaned from the court email: 23/10/2017 – 91XXXX; 22/11/2017 – 91XXXX; 25/10/2017 – 91XXXX. The original claim had been erroneously sent to the wrong address by the Claimant, enabling a non-deserved default judgment. I have had to seek a set aside to this judgment, in order to get to this point.

Statement of truth:

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true. I understand ...etc

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DEFENCE

 

1. The parking charges referred to in this claim did not arise from any agreement of terms. The charge and the claim were unexpected. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.  Liability is denied.

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle, Renault Megan Scenic with registration XXXX.

3. At the time of the event, the Defendant fully resided at XXXXX, where the purported parking event took place, and where they had and retained primacy of contract (Jopson v HomeGuard, [2016]).  

4. 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 he cannot be criticised for using, in part, pre-written wording suggested by a reliable online help resource. The Claimant is urged not to patronise the Defendant with (ironically template) unfounded accusations of not understanding his defence. 

5. The Defendant acknowledges that this case is centred more on the inability of the Claimant to properly address the rights via primacy of contract as bequeathed to the tenant, even if references are made to other forms of communication including signages.

6. This Claimant stipulated the payment by the Dependant of £XXX for the PCNs and damages, plus an additional £XXX in other charges, and continues to pursue this disproportionate fixed sum (routinely added per PCN) despite knowing that this is now likely to be confirmed as banned by the Government this year. It is denied that the purported 'damages' or 'debt fee' sought was incurred or is recoverable. Attention is drawn to paras 98, 100, 193, 198 of ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC67.  Also ParkingEye Ltd v Somerfield Stores Ltd ChD [2011] EWHC 4023(QB) where the parking charge was £75, discounted to £37.50 for prompt payment.  Whilst £75 was reasonable, HHJ Hegarty (sitting at the High Court; later ratified by the CoA) held in paras 419-428 that unspecified 'admin costs' inflating it to £135 'would appear to be penal'.

(I will then add the rest of the template below)

 

KeithP

NGSomebody said:

I am about to hand-deliver my Defence at the Romford High Court against a 26 June 2023 deadline.

Wait a minute... STOP!!

Why are you planning to deliver a Defence to a Romford court?
Is there even a Romford High Court?
Not often these parking events get decided at a High Court.

A little background information might be useful...

Have you received a County Court Claim?
If so, did that Claim come from the County Court Business Centre in Northampton?
If so, what is the Issue Date on that Claim and have you filed an Acknowledgment of Service?

After re-reading your post, I get the impression that you may be trying to get a default County Court Judgment set aside. Is that right? Or has that Default Judgment already been set aside?

That'll do for now except... welcome to the forum.  

NGSomebody

Thanks for 'Stopping' me.
I was supposed to type Romford County Court.  

A CCC was sent to my former address despite me being on the electoral register in my new address. I paid £275 to apply for a set aside after the Claimant agreed to  stop the process on the condition that I pay £108 fee for something that has to do with the filing. 

Yes, the CCC came from the Northampton CCBC.

Just before the set aside hearing, the Claimant agreed to the set aside. The cost session lasted for barely 5 minutes. I was asked to submit my defence by the 26th (14 days).

I am now looking to do that. The Court ushers and the rep for the Claimant mentioned I could submit via a letterbox at the Court. 

Mouse007

KeithP said:

NGSomebody said:

I am about to hand-deliver my Defence at the Romford High Court against a 26 June 2023 deadline.

Wait a minute... STOP!!

Alarm BELLS - that STOP is well placed. You need to provide a bit more info about your exact situation and answer KiethP's questions.

Nothing in your post follows the normal time lines. Neither the claim nor your response.

Romford High Court?

Witness Statement and Defence together?

Please start with where you are now - what have you receieved? on what date?

Coupon-mad

Did the Judge order that the Claimants pay back your £275 fee - or didn't you know how to argue that?

Too late now...but they were liable.

You should have paid £108 fee direct to the CCBC (not £275) and not had a hearing at all, but it sounds like you didn't realise they meant from the outset that they'd consented.

Ermmm:
you didn't pay the Claimants £108 as well as paying the court £275, did you? Please say you didn't.

NGSomebody

@Mouse007, I have updated for your comment. Thanks. 

@Coupon-mad,
I asked for the £275 to be refunded, but the judge said he'd reserve the cost. 

No, I didn't initially pay the £108...🙏 I did not know I should have paid it. I had actually refused to pay it arguing that the DCBL solicitor should not make me pay for their mistake...oh my.

Coupon-mad

You were correct to argue that!

Even better that costs were reserved, so that means you can argue for them and when they discontinue (because they will) you can send an email to the Judge reminding them about your reserved £275.

NGSomebody

Oh...OK...I feel better again. Thank you. 

Do you think my WS and Defence is decent enough to go in?

Coupon-mad

Defence looks OK as a start, except remove paragraph 4, which is not really relevant and interrupts your point.

I think you are missing a defence point or two:

FIRSTLY read what @Johnersh (a solicitor) recently said here about a gated site - use some of this:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/80119838#Comment_80119838

I would add that the claim - as is common in parking cases including ParkingEye v Beavis, which is fully distinguished - rests on an allegation stated in the Particulars of Claim that the Defendant 'agreed' to the parking terms by the conduct of parking the car in breach of the contract (the sign).

But which came first?  In fact, the car was already parked and SORNed long before the new signs went up (unannounced) and no communications were sent to residents to draw their attention to any change, let alone seek consensus to accept such onerous new terms.

Such terms foisted upon residents would clearly have the unsolicited and unwelcome effect of interfering with existing rights/grants, including riding roughshod over the Head Lease which no doubt grants residents the standard implied or stated right to 'peaceful enjoyment'.  Not that tenants get access to Head Leases, but parking firms do and must, because when rocking up to target residents at such sites, professional British Parking Association AOS members must ensure in advance that they are not interfering with any primary rights, grants or easements.  As such, this Claimant is put to strict proof that they carried out the required due diligence and notified all residents about the changes in advance, and the Defendant expects the Claimant to produce the Head Lease for the court to interpret the rights that the Defendant says were ignored.

In any event, notwithstanding the Head Lease wording, the Defendant specifically denies any parking conduct which breached any terms because it will be common ground that there were no such terms at the material time when the vehicle was left (properly SORNed and not moved) at the Defendant's home.

I don't see any exhibits referred to in your WS.  That's a mistake!  The WS needs to append actual court transcripts of Jopson v Homeguard and Link v Parkinson if you can find them.  After all, your defence references Jopson!

You'll also need to exhibit these:

- proof of when the vehicle was SORNed and

- a copy of the complaints you made and the replies which saw the first 2 PCNs cancelled, and

- a copy of your Tenancy Agreement.

And who is the solicitor Spring Parking are using? You realise you MUST copy them into your bundle when you email the local court?

Please show us a photo of the sign.

Is leaving a vehicle SORNed a clearly stated contravention?

Is the £100 in 'BIG'?

Also in this bundle:

Where is your costs schedule reminding the court that Judge xxxxxxx ordered that your N244 costs be 'reserved' and repeating the bit about the annotation in the White Book (it's at end of the template defence) to put your foot firmly in the door to expect your £275 costs ordered against the C if they now run away and discontinue the claim, after causing this mayhem in your life and to your otherwise perfect credit record all caused by them not bothering to do a 28 pence 'soft trace' (breaching the BPA Code of Practice).

NGSomebody

Thanks, @Coupon-mad. I appreciate.

NGSomebody

After the move, I could not find my 'tenancy agreement' for that tenancy. 

I hope it won't be too damaging.