Defending a Private PCN in County Court

bohomark

Okay, I've done a lot of reading, over the weekend and made a start on the defence. Please could I have some feedback, on what I have so far?

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

 

3. On the date of the alleged contravention, the Defendant was attending a XXXXX XXXXXXX licensing course, organised and run by XXXXXX XXXXX (XXXXX). The course ran from December Xth until December Xth. On the day in question, the Defendant had permission to park in the carpark and had been allocated a parking permit. He parked in one of the bays allocated XXXXXX, along with several rented vehicles, hired by XXXXXX for the use of the students on the course. The Defendant displayed the parking permit and left the vehicle. On returning to the vehicle, The Defendant found a PCN on the windscreen.

Although, the Defendant seems to recollect a sign near the entrance to the rear carpark, it was not possible to read as driving through the entrance to the rear carpark, in a speedy convoy, with 30 students, hustling to get to the course on time. The Defendant does not recall any signs on the wall in or near the parking bay in which he parked.

bohomark

Also, is it relevant that the Claimant has given the wrong postcode? The postcode on the Claim Form is actually on the other side of the road.

Coupon-mad

Looks good, except that last paragraph needs to be numbered #4 and those will replace paras 3 & 4 in Johny's longer defence that I linked you to in my earlier reply.

bohomark

bohomark said:

Also, is it relevant that the Claimant has given the wrong postcode? The postcode on the Claim Form is actually on the other side of the road.

Thanks @Coupon-mad. Could you tell me if this is worth including in the defence too? 

Coupon-mad

It's a small matter but you could mention it in paragraph 2, and state that the Defendant denies that the vehicle was parked at POSTCODE at all.

bohomark

I am almost done writing the defence. I have used Johny's full defence (all paragraphs), with my defence inserted at the beginning.

For the sake of diligence, I just wanted to check that paragraphs 10, 11 and 12, which refer to the DLUHC's statutory code of practice (currently stalled) is still the case. It does say incoming in 2023, which we are half way through.

...and finally to check that no other parts of the defence need editing or deleting depending on the particulars of the claim.

Thanks again for all the info and help.

Coupon-mad

Yes that's right.

The DLUHC's announcement about the new Code of Practice is due later this month "before Summer Recess" so it's imminent.

bohomark

The first paragraphs now look like this:

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

3. On the date the PCN was issued, the Defendant was attending a Close Protection licensing course, organised and run by  XXXXX (address). The course ran from December Xth until December Xth 2020. On the day in question, the Defendant had permission to park in the carpark and had been allocated a parking permit. He parked in one of the bays allocated to XXXXX, along with several rented vehicles, hired by XXXXX for the use of the students on the course. The Defendant displayed the parking permit and left the vehicle. On returning to the vehicle, The Defendant found a PCN on the windscreen. The above is attested to by Mr XXXXX who was (position held), and was both in charge of the course and in attendance, at XXXXX, on the date the PCN was issued. Mr XXXXX is happy to provide a Witness Statement, confirming all of the above.

4. Although, the Defendant has some recollection of a sign near the entrance to the rear carpark, it was not possible to read while driving past, in a speedy convoy of six vehicles, as per the requirements of a close protection motorcade. The Defendant does not recall any signs on the wall in or near the parking bay in which he parked.

5. After explaining the situation to representatives of the Claimant, several times, both on the phone and via the appeals page of the Claimant’s website, and since the Claimant will not listen to reason, rather continues to harass and threaten the Defendant, the Defendant has come to the conclusion that there is no alternative but to submit to a hearing.

Coupon-mad

Looks good to fit within the Template.  You didn't add this?

"It's a small matter but you could mention it in paragraph 2, and state that the Defendant denies that the vehicle was parked at POSTCODE at all".

bohomark

Coupon-mad said:

Looks good to fit within the Template.  You didn't add this?

"It's a small matter but you could mention it in paragraph 2, and state that the Defendant denies that the vehicle was parked at POSTCODE at all".

Yes, thank you, I will. Being a very recently graduated Forumite, I hadn't realised that I need to refresh the feed, to see your responses, so I just read them all this evening. Thanks again. I really appreciate all the assistance.