BWLegal £800 fine

Fruitcake

Other search engines are available.

Nexa

I googled CNBC phone number and nothing came up. I now have found it and will call them tommorow. There's no way into the MCOL site as the sign is only through that stupid gov.uk website of which there is no way to reset your password, only to get a temporary login code emailed to you which then doesn't let you reset your actual password.

Upon speaking to family they have mentioned that they don't think that I have a defence as I don't have an "excuse" as to why I was parked there. I feel that they have a point but my understanding is I'm appealing this on the grounds that what the parking company is doing is wrong in fining me rather than explaining a reason why I was legitimately parked there. Can anyone clarify

KeithP

Nexa said:

I googled CNBC phone number and nothing came up.

Yes I just did that too.
Sure the first few entries returned are all about an American television company, but still on the first page we see...

Civil National Business Centre (CNBC) - Court Finder - GOV.UK

...where there are lots of useful telephone numbers and all their email addresses.

Gr1pr

Nexa said:

Upon speaking to family they have mentioned that they don't think that I have a defence as I don't have an "excuse" as to why I was parked there.

I feel that they have a point but my understanding is I'm appealing this on the grounds that what the parking company is doing is wrong in fining me rather than explaining a reason why I was legitimately parked there. Can anyone clarify

You are not appealing, the deadline to appeal expired a long time ago, you are defending the case as the defendant because you have already submitted your defence weeks ago 

Reading through the thread, you have never mentioned any appeals, not for any of the 6 or 7 pcn cases

The DQ is your N180 form, where you nominate your local civil court etc , once completed you email it to the CNBC in Northampton, which I think you have done 

Lastly, the parking company did not fine you, magistrates issue fines, no magistrates have been involved, and never will be 

The private parking company issued a parking charge notice, a PCN , for the alleged breach of the parking contract on that private property, either it was correctly issued, or it wasn't, either you owe them money, or you don't 

Nexa

Gr1pr said:

Nexa said:

Upon speaking to family they have mentioned that they don't think that I have a defence as I don't have an "excuse" as to why I was parked there.

I feel that they have a point but my understanding is I'm appealing this on the grounds that what the parking company is doing is wrong in fining me rather than explaining a reason why I was legitimately parked there. Can anyone clarify

You are not appealing, the deadline to appeal expired a long time ago, you are defending the case as the defendant because you have already submitted your defence weeks ago 

Reading through the thread, you have never mentioned any appeals, not for any of the 6 or 7 pcn cases

The DQ is your N180 form, where you nominate your local civil court etc , once completed you email it to the CNBC in Northampton, which I think you have done 

Lastly, the parking company did not fine you, magistrates issue fines, no magistrates have been involved, and never will be 

The private parking company issued a parking charge notice, a PCN , for the alleged breach of the parking contract on that private property, either it was correctly issued, or it wasn't, either you owe them money, or you don't 

What I'm saying is me nor anyone I have spoke to thinks it was incorrectly issued. I don't have any evidence it was incorrectly issued but I'm still being advised to defend it. 

Gr1pr

Well its either defend it and even if you lost in court the chances are that the total sum would be around £200 for a single PCN and not the inflated amount claimed , so not £800 for several PCNs, but less 

Or 

Pay it in full 

Coupon-mad

But they are not going to pay it, so it should not be stated as an option IMHO.

Defending ANY parking claim (regardless of facts or merit) is a no-brainer because even if you lose, it's less than on the claim form. You don't need evidence that it was wrongly issued.  Just use the template defence. 

Nexa

I have now received a hearing date which is the 15th October 2024 as well as 50 pages of claim support from a land registry file to photographs of my car there's also a witness statement and argument from a paralegal picking apart my defence from the template line by line.

One of the points raised is that I've been seeking advice from the MoneySavingExpert forum, which the solicitor claims to see frequently. I've attached an image can attach more if anyone wants

Gr1pr

They would say that, wouldn't they, so a judge may say. "so what. ?"

Just make sure that your WS + Exhibits bundle has been sent to the local court and to their lawyers ( or claimant if no lawyers were used. ) before the deadline imposed upon you by the court order you received, the order with the hearing date on it 

Johnersh

The problem with any template is that it is a guide. It is correct that to simply deploy it without understanding the points raised (or eliminating any which are not relevant) is unhelpful.

That said, in the vast majority of cases it is the particulars that are lacking in detail. Any additional facts can be put in the witness evidence...

In relation to the other points

A) this is disingenuous. There's plenty to point to around the code that was in the offing, but it's true that none of that is necessarily authoritative.

.B) The case law in PE v Somerfield considers entirely different points from Beavis. The latter is an authority in relation to the law on penalties. It specifically states that the penalty rule was engaged and nowhere does it support a contention that *all* PCNs are enforceable - whatever the claimant may suggest/imply.

C) I'd prefer to deal with unhelpful judgments at court rather than to have flagged them in a defence. It's also true that the template wording is inelegant with its criticism. But one might note that this issue is just mud slinging by the claimant.

D) if the particulars are drafted in the standard driver and/or keeper format (i.e. pleaded in the alternative) it is perfectly reasonable to address pofa in a defence. Whether or not the claimant chooses to rely on that (which they may not since this is a residential site and the identity of the driver probably pretty clear) is a matter for them.


More to the point, these are generic points of the claimants own. What about the facts of the case?

If the PPC have served supporting documents, what are they saying about your duty/obligations to pay? Those are the arguments that need to be focused on.