Napier Parking/BW Legal - defence
As per the guidance in this forum, I raised a SAR with Napier, notified BW Legal and told them I was seeking debt guidance. They have put the claim on hold for 30 days.
So now I need to prepare the defence, using the template in here.
Question: - where do I find the Claim number? Does this come in the post from the court? I presume I need this before I can email the court with my defence?
This is what I propose putting in my defence under para 2 and 3. Grateful for any suggested improvements:
The facts as known to the Defendant:
2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle. The Defendant denies being the driver.
3. [EXPLAIN IN YOUR OWN WORDS...NB: defences are written in the THIRD person as 'the Defendant', not 'I did this' nor 'my/me'].
The driver was parked in the car park and had purchased a valid ticket on [DATE}. It appears from the photo in the PCN that the ticket was clearly present, but had fallen face-down onto the dashboard.
Upon receipt of the PCN which arrived in the post to the surprise of the Defendant, the Defendant found the parking ticket in the car, and emailed the Claimant with a photo of the valid parking ticket showing the time stamp. The Defendant was not the driver and was not present in the car park on the day in question, so was therefore unaware of any notices that may or may not have been displayed in the car park.
The Claimant treated the Defendant’s email as an appeal. Despite being emailed with the valid, paid-for ticket, proving that the Claimant did not incur any loss, the Claimant rejected the “appeal” on the grounds that the ticket was overturned, which they claim is a contravention of the signs (which the Defendant didn’t see as they weren’t in the car park). The rejection letter included photos of a sign, which presumably is in the car park, and several photos of the ticket clearly displayed in the windscreen, albeit face-down.
The ticket was paid for and well-within the time limit, so it is clear that Napier incurred no loss, and should have closed the case.
The Defendant researched similar situations on the Internet and discovered a wealth of reports that the Claimant, and some other parking management companies engage in the pursuit of disproportionate claims such as this, where no loss has occurred. It appears their intention is to worry their quarry into paying an exorbitant fine with threats of court action.
Following advice from the forums, the Defendant disregarded the numerous letters and demands, until a Letter of Claim was received from the Claimant’s solicitors.
<<<Para 4 and onwards will be appended.
Many thanks for your help, can't believe this has been dragging on for so long. It has caused my partner a lot of distress.
- All Categories
- 338.7K Banking & Borrowing
- 248.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 447.5K Spending & Discounts
- 230.7K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 171K Life & Family
- 243.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards