Gatwick North Terminal PCN - Business Court Claim Form

GiftHorse19

Coupon-mad said:

Yes you can ask for a remote hearing in your DQ N180 form, which arrives in a couple of months.  No question about it? WRITE IT IN ANYWAY!

Make sure (on that form) you liberally blank out availability dates for a hearing at least a week either side of your house move and things like holidays and your whole first 2 weeks of work, if you are starting a new job or studies.

Yes please show us your draft paras 2, 3 and 4 of your defence.  But you aren't advised to submit it in a hurry - not this week - as Keith said. There is good reason not to do it early.

Draft paragraphs below:

The facts as known to the Defendant:

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

3. 

3.1 The Defendant had travelled to Gatwick North Terminal to collect family who were arriving on a flight from Belfast. The purpose of the journey was to bring the Defendant’s niece and her parents to Brighton where the niece was starting her first year at university.

Due to the fact this was the Defendant’s first time collecting anyone from Gatwick Airport, the busyness of the airport on this particular Saturday, and also trying to locate family from the crowds of people, the Defendant did not clearly see the drop off charge signage displayed. After a brief period waiting for family to arrive and packing their baggage into the car, the Defendant left the airport and proceeded on their journey to Brighton.

3.2 The Defendant received a letter dated Jan-2023 by a legal firm representing the Claimant, stating that the Defendant was liable for a total charge of £180. The letter claimed that the Defendant had received a penalty charge notice (PCN) for a balance of £100 which had been unpaid. The letter went on to state that an additional ‘debt recovery charge’ of £80 had been applied so that the total amount owed by the Defendant was now £180. The Defendant would like to state they did not receive the initial PCN and can only assume this was not delivered to the Defendant’s current address.

3.3 The Defendant received a further threatening notice from the legal firm representing the Claimant on Feb-2023 to state the £180 charge was still owed and a Letter of Claim would be forthcoming if not paid.

3.4 The Defendant received a County Court Claim on Jun-2023 claiming the total amount owed to the Claimant was now £270.18 to include additional “court fees” and “legal fees”. The Defendant submitted an Acknowledgement of Service on 03/07/23, indicating that they intend to defend their case against these egregious charges.

Summary of Defence:

·       It is the Defendant’s view that the current charges of £270.18 claimed are exorbitant to the £5 original drop-off fee originally owed by the Defendant, which they do not contest as it is admitted the Defendant used the drop-off zone for a brief time period.

·       With respect to the £100 charge on the original PCN, he Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) 2012 sets out there must first of all be a breach of a 'relevant contract or relevant obligation'. Therefore, in the specifics of this case, there should have been adequate signs warning of the £100 charge for failure to pay by midnight the day after use of the drop-off zone. The Claimant is required to have proper, prominent signs warning of the £100 (not just the £5 drop off fee) on approach. The Defendant had no knowledge of (or any way to learn about) a contract to pay £100, because none of the approach lane overhead signs inform one of this.

·       The Defendant did not receive the original PCN and was not made aware of the charges against them until the legal firm representing the Claimant issued a letter claiming for £180. The Defendant therefore had no option to resolve the matter and redress the small outstanding balance in a reasonable manner. It is the Defendant’s view that the £180 charge is well beyond what can be reasonably claimed, for what was an honest mistake in forgetting to pay the charge within the timeframe stipulated by the Claimant.

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 they 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 unfounded accusations of not understanding their defence. 

Coupon-mad

You don't need those narrative paragraphs 3.2 onwards.

Scrap them and come back near to your defence deadline this month to see what the DLUHC's draft Impact Assessment has given us which we trust & hope will strengthen parking case defences.

You want the latest version of the Template Defence in July, which will be the new version AFTER the DLUHC has resurrected the Code of Practice.

I will be editing the Template. Your timing is tight (and certainly don't miss your Monday deadline) but DON'T rush to email the defence this week.

GiftHorse19

Coupon-mad said:

You don't need those narrative paragraphs 3.2 onwards.

Scrap them and come back near to your defence deadline this month to see what the DLUHC's draft Impact Assessment has given us which we trust & hope will strengthen parking case defences.

You want the latest version of the Template Defence in July, which will be the new version AFTER the DLUHC has resurrected the Code of Practice.

I will be editing the Template. Your timing is tight (and certainly don't miss your Monday deadline) but DON'T rush to email the defence this week.

I am leaving for a holiday tomorrow morning and unlikely to have access to a PAC/laptop by my file in date so I was planning to submit today. I know that's not ideal as per your recommendations but I worry I could miss my date altogether.

I will remove from 3.2 onwards as per your recommendations.

Are there any last minute 'must-have' things I should include before I submit?

Coupon-mad

I assume it is done which is far better than not!  Did you get an auto-acknowledgement?

GiftHorse19

Coupon-mad said:

I assume it is done which is far better than not!  Did you get an auto-

Yes submitted just this morning and got an auto reply!

Will sort the next steps when I get back next week. Thanks for help so far. 

GiftHorse19

GiftHorse19 said:

Coupon-mad said:

I assume it is done which is far better than not!  Did you get an auto-

Yes submitted just this morning and got an auto reply!

Will sort the next steps when I get back next week. Thanks for help so far. 

Hello again - I've now moved back to NI and have just received a Directions Questionnaire N180 for my case above (had hoped they'd given up by now!).

In terms of my next steps, I am referring to @bargepole 's post and I have added my comments below in italics which I'd appreciate your views on before I submit the form.

• A1 = NO to mediation (they want the whole amount, you want to pay them nothing, so no scope for mediation. This will not go against you). I don't feel I have a particularly strong case so I'm wondering is it time to mediate? My only argument I can see is that they didn't send the initial notice to my London address so by the time I saw the fine it was actually from the legal company and the amount they were asking for was £180 which I thought was extortionate. The £5 signage at Gatwick is pretty clear, but I would argue the subsequent £100 fine after is not. Any other grounds on which you think I can legitmately challenge this case and win?
  
• D1 = name of your local County Court – unless you are a Ltd company, the case files will be transferred there. I am back in NI, should I put an NI court or my previous local court in London but ask to appear via video link?
  

Cheers!

Coupon-mad

No to Mediation.

Put your local Court in NI and put in the body of the email that you now reside again in NI, and thus live outside of the E&W court jurisdiction.

Let's see how that goes down...

P.S. the CNBC email addresses have changed. See the Template Defence thread.

GiftHorse19

Coupon-mad said:

No to Mediation.

Put your local Court in NI and put in the body of the email that you now reside again in NI, and thus lice outside of the E&W court jurisdiction.

Let's see how that goes down...

P.S. the CNBC email addresses have changed. See the Template Defence thread.

I responded to the CNBC with the DQ and text in my email as you suggested. 

I have received a letter this week stating "The Claimant, you have been sent Notice of Proposed Allocation to Track which specified the date by which you were required to return the DQ. You have failed to file the DQ with the CNBC by the date specified in the Notice..."

I assume as this has been addressed to 'The Claimant' this has just been sent to me for reference and there is no further action?

Coupon-mad

Correct.  Maybe they gave up, due to the NI address.  Did the CNBC use your NI address as you had told them?  If not, reiterate your service address is in NI.

nopcns

Too late now as they admitted to being the driver in the defence but why didn't the OP also defend on no keeper liability?