County Court Defence - ParkingEye ANPR - KFC Carpark

Coupon-mad

OK so the POC are vague. 'Parking without authorisation' fails to specify the conduct that caused an alleged breach and it fails to state the term that was so breached, or at what time (the time is important due to grace period rules.  A date and this vague allegation is not specific enough to comply with the CPRs). 

They've also no doubt sued for £120 despite the fact the signs say £100.

Search the forum for:

ParkingEye defence first 2023 added £20

You should find wording written last month in a PE case that you can copy.

Are you currently writing your WS?

TheBoulder

Morning!

Apologies for the slow response, I haven't been back on the forum as nothing had really progressed with the court processing times. However i wanted to provide an update if you keep a tally! And also for anyone that may like to read this thread in the future.

I was in the process of writing my WS when I received notice that the case had been moved to my local County Court  and was awaiting allocation for a hearing.

The same week I received a letter from PE where they stated they 'were prepared to accept £70.00 in settlement to resolve the matter' if payment was received in 14 days. The letter was ignored.

2 weeks later I received a further letter from PE stating that the 'Parking Charge is cancelled and that the Court had been notified that PE no longer wishes to proceed with the clam.'

WINNER!!

Thanks to all that responded here and those that have contributed to such a library of information. Merry Christmas!

Coupon-mad

Yay!  Same as this one:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/80472427/#Comment_80472427

Congrats.  That's a win!

  

ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST!

And we know it's a busy week but can we count on you joining us in this vital Inquiry?

Please find time to do this relevant 'court work call for evidence' this week before it closes:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/80375249/#Comment_80375249

The Committee invites evidence on:

• What the current level of delay in the County Court is

• The ways in which the County Court engages with litigants in person, and how this could be improved

• The causes of action giving rise to claims in the County Court

• What future reforms to the County Court should be considered.

Please tell them that private parking firms and their bulk litigators are the problem as far as small claims delays are concerned, as they dominate court lists.

Parking claim numbers are rising every year and will make up about a third of all small claims in 2023, based on the 2022 figures that the MoJ divulged in the DLUHC's recent Parking Code of Practice draft Impact Assessment.

Close to half a million parking claims are now made (2023 likely figure).

Astonishing that this has been allowed to happen and even worse, the CNBC thinks the answer is to EXPAND to accommodate it!

The MoJ must be required to separate parking cases by introducing a new pre-action protocol requiring use of ADR instead of inflated debt demands and bulk litigators who want court. It should be a last resort but it's the first.

These MPs are inviting evidence not rants or opinion so we need people like you to respond, who are currently caught up in this nightmare that you are.

You want to change things?

This Committee is your voice.

As you know, the Government is already regulating the private parking industry, so they are listening and are aware of the scourge of unfair PCNs from rogues and bulk litigators.

Interested parties have until 22 December to make a submission to the committee.

It's vital that this Committee hears loud & clear that the problem is parking claims and bulk litigators dominating the small claims track.

TheBoulder

Submitted

Coupon-mad

Great stuff. The more the better.