Claim Form recieved - do I need pointers on my defence... or pay up?

shizzlemynizzle

Hi all,

Big fan of your work. I hope you don’t mind me confirming particulars of my case prior to beginning the process as I wouldn’t want to unnecessarily waste anyone’s valuable time on this forum. Especially as I’ve already lost track of the timeline/not followed up on some critical steps:

-PCN issued 09/22
-Alleged overstay of 3~ hours (max stay 2 hours - total stay 5~ hours) via ANPR
-Location: Rom Valley Road, RM7 0AF
-There is a single reasonably sized sign warning of max stay upon the only entrance via car (doesn’t show on current GSV. They must’ve updated the signs after installing ANPR)

-Claim Form Issue Date: 22 Jun 23, via DCB Legal, including £50 legal representatives costs

I don’t seem to have the original PCN to hand but I did appeal in time using the blue template, although this was rejected. I’m sure I followed the process to appeal the rejection however I don’t recall receiving a follow up with POPLA code (I suppose this doesn’t make a difference now?).

I earlier received an LoC, but I mistook it for the usual colour letters so I haven't submitted an SRA yet. Would this still be useful?

There are no specific circumstances that I can recall that could be added to my defence, although the car is insured with multiple named drivers.

Before posting this, I spent some time trying to find a defence that matched my circumstances but I’m rather struggling - what with the overstay being so long.

I understand that an AOS needs to be issued urgently (before 11th July?).
So my question: before I do this, I wanted to know if I really have a leg to stand on, given that the overstay is substantial?

I know that DCBL are likely to discontinue but I didn’t want to take this for granted without first checking with you.

To add to this, I would have to make some sacrifices for the next few months but I am perhaps one of the fortunate ones who could theoretically pay now to cease this if that’s your advice.

Thanks in advance

KeithP

shizzlemynizzle said:

Claim Form Issue Date: 22 Jun 23, via DCB Legal, including £50 legal representatives costs

I understand that an AOS needs to be issued urgently (before 11th July?).

So my question: before I do this, I wanted to know if I really have a leg to stand on, given that the overstay is substantial?

Yes, you are right with your Acknowledgment of Service deadline.

Why not just file an Acknowledgment of Service by 11th July - it'll only take a few minutes - to give yourself another couple of weeks to decide whether you defend yourself further?

Here's some detail...

With a Claim Issue Date of 22nd June, you have until Tuesday 11th July 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 Tuesday 25th July 2023 to file your Defence.

That's nearly three 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'.

1505grandad

Are the claimants UK Parking Control Ltd?

Umkomaas

Meet all the court procedural requirements, then find your case recorded on the following thread ....

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

Coupon-mad

As we are now in July please note that something big is coming that affects and helps you.

Things are changing quickly this Summer. As you are so close to the DLUHC's Announcement about the new statutory Code, I would do the AOS (of course, to buy the extra time) and PREPARE the defence - but hold off emailing it, wait and see...

...and of course diarise an alert for the deadline date so you don't actually miss your deadline.

Your timing is perfect if the DLUHC in their Draft Impact Assessment (due in a couple of weeks) give us all some damning words to add!

I will be changing the Template Defence to suit, this month.

Do the AOS then diarise to come back a couple of days before your deadline.

shizzlemynizzle

Thanks all! AOS filed.

@KeithP , the reason for dithering on the AOS was because from my reading it seemed I can't confirm AOS and then later admit all of the claim (which I was considering due to a flimsy defence or because I wasn't sure how any of this process might affect my upcoming remortgage).

Now that I've submitted this I can see there is still the ability to admit and pay all - in case anyone else was wondering.

@1505grandad , UKPC, that's right

@Coupon-mad , thanks for that info, I'll bear that in mind. I was cautious that not having any specific circumstances to add to the defence (point 3 of the template) might be a problem but I will draft something up and let you know.

Calender reminder set for 25th July (with notifications prior). See you all soon

KeithP

shizzlemynizzle said:

@KeithP , the reason for dithering on the AOS was because from my reading it seemed I can't confirm AOS and then later admit all of the claim (which I was considering due to a flimsy defence or because I wasn't sure how any of this process might affect my upcoming remortgage).

Now that I've submitted this I can see there is still the ability to admit and pay all - in case anyone else was wondering.

Glad you worked that out.
In fact, if you were so minded, you can pay what the Claimant wants at anytime up until walking through the courtroom door. By the way, that is not a suggestion.  

Coupon-mad

then later admit all of the claim (which I was considering due to a flimsy defence.

Which you will NOT now be doing.  Eeek no!!

Deciding later on to settle a claim before a hearing is not 'admitting the claim later'.  It's just "deciding to pay it off" and it's always an option.  

But...don't do it!  Paying is a pointless option.

DEFEND THE CLAIM IN FULL.

It is a no-brainer.  Honestly.

or because I wasn't sure how any of this process might affect my upcoming remortgage).

Which it cannot.

Not even if you lose at a hearing because you'd just pay.  No CCJ!

AND YOU'D PAY LESS THAN THE CLAIM.  

Did you miss the bit in the NEWBIES thread which says this - that defending risks nothing at all?  Why do you think we help everyone defend claims every single day here...  Not a single poster risks their credit rating.

We don't put anyone's credit at risk.

Please trust us and our advice.

shizzlemynizzle

Coupon-mad said:

or because I wasn't sure how any of this process might affect my upcoming remortgage).

Which it cannot.

Not even if you lose at a hearing because you'd just pay.  No CCJ!

AND YOU'D PAY LESS THAN THE CLAIM.  

Did you miss the bit in the NEWBIES thread which says this - that defending risks nothing at all?  Why do you think we help everyone defend claims every single day here...  Not a single poster risks their credit rating.

We don't put anyone's credit at risk.

Please trust us and our advice.

Thanks for confirming!

Perhaps in my flurry I'd missed the emphasis on that point. I wondered if it'd be caught under any 'do you owe any entities money' kinda questions - but I'm absolutely onboard with you now. Thanks again for the support, all.

My defence is due on 25th July and I can't see that there's any update on the DLUHC's new CoP. So just to note that I'm drafting a defence using the current (March 2022) template. If this is incorrect, give me a shout

KeithP

shizzlemynizzle said:
So just to note that I'm drafting a defence using the current (March 2022) template. If this is incorrect, give me a shout

Keep going. That's the way forward.
Show us your paragraphs 2 and 3 when you are ready.

shizzlemynizzle

Hello chaps/chapettes,

Heads up, this may be just average but here's my attempt after a few hours of reading:

The facts as known to the Defendant:

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

3. The Defendant does not recall the specific circumstances of the day they received the parking ticket over 10 months ago. However, on a subsequent visit to the site, the Defendant noted the following:

1. There is only one reasonably sized sign advising of a time limit.
2. This sign can be obscured by other vehicles entering the premises or is otherwise positioned where a driver is immediately required to focus on the upcoming road structure and moving traffic.
3. There is no other reasonably sized signage towards the retail premises shop doors from any of the parking places.

4. The Defendant followed the Claimant's appeals process, which states that the Defendant would receive a POPLA code after their initial appeal was rejected. However, the Defendant did not receive a POPLA code. As a result, the Defendant was unable to appeal the decision to POPLA, and the opportunity to dismiss this case without consuming court time was missed. Therefore, the Defendant alleges that the Claimant did not comply with their own appeals process and failed to send the POPLA code. The Claimant is put to proof that this is not the case.

5. The Defendant has seen no actual evidence of continuous parking time and has no idea about any breach, which is denied.  The Defendant shops at the location but has never knowingly overstayed, so it is suggested that this instance is more likely to be a typical ANPR error known as a 'double dip' (a phrase even used by Government in the new Code of Practice linked in this defence).  This is known in the industry as an inherent and well-documented likely flaw of ANPR, which cannot be relied upon to sign off a PCN without human checks.  AOS members are required to carry out manual checks to discount the possibility of 'orphan images' in the middle, denoting two visits within 24 hours, wrongly read as one period of parking (for example to return something, or to buy a forgotten item).  Given that ANPR defaults to 'first in, last out' images, the Claimant is put to strict proof of all ANPR captures of the vehicle onsite that day and of their documented human checks before this PCN was issued.


[paras 4-27 from the template (to be renumbered)]

Feedback points:

• I've undoubtedly missed some reading so let me know
  
• I've seen conflicting advice on leaving something like point 3.1 in. Thoughts?
• I wasn't sure if keeping the POPLA part in was relevant - no harm in doing so? (note that this may have been due during the postal strikes - if that's at all relevant)

Any pointers appreciated