Defence for PCN

severus90

Hi All,

I've read through the forum and the excellent guidance, and have prepared a template defence, and would just appreciate any specific guidance/critique / changes.

Please see the Paragraph 1-4 adapted from the template defence:

1.  The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.  It is denied that any conduct by the driver was in breach of any term.  Further, it is denied that this Claimant (understood to have a bare licence as agents) has standing to sue or form contracts in their own name. Liability is denied, whether or not the Claimant is claiming 'keeper liability', which is unclear from the boilerplate text in the Particulars of Claim ('the POC').

The facts known to the Defendant:

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper, but not the driver of the vehicle at the time in question.

3. On the evening of the REDACTED, the driver of the vehicle was visiting their relatives, REDACTED, who live at REDACTED. On arrival at the residential parking area, the driver was directed by REDACTED to park in one of the allocated parking spaces that REDACTED have exclusive entitlement to use according to the terms of their lease. REDACTED gave the driver a valid visitor permit to display in the vehicle. Unfortunately, due to the high wind speeds on the evening in question, the permit appears to have been blown over by the wind, in such a way that made it more difficult for the representative of REDACTED PARKING COMPANY to verify the permit details when they came to check the vehicle the following day.

Nonetheless, the driver was parked with the full permission of REDACTED, who have unconditional permissions in their lease to use their allocated spaces for the enjoyment of themselves and their visitors. There are no conditions within the lease document that require REDACTED, or permitted visitors to display a permit when using their allocated spaces. No other parties had permission from REDACTED to use the space on the dates in question, and therefore the inconvenience and loss arising as a result of the displaying of the permit was negligible.

severus90

I also have some questions relating to potential supporting evidence.

I assume that a copy of the lease document giving the parking permissions would be good supporting evidence. I also assume that a witness statement from the relatives of the driver supporting the assertion that there was a valid permit, albeit one mistakenly displayed? 

Is there any other useful supporting evidence to consider?

KeithP

Hello and welcome.

Do you have a County Court Claim against you?
If so, what is the Issue Date on the Claim Form?
Are you the named Defendant?
Have you filed an Acknowledgment of Service? 
If so, when did you do that?
Who is the Claimant?
Is the Claimant represented by a solicitor?
If so, who?

YankeeBrit

Perhaps a tad too much "REDACTED" to be able to assist. Whilst the thread title mentions "defence" of a "PCN", that really doesn't offer us much to go on. As @KeithP has requested above, a bit more detail would be useful.

In order to assist the OP, they should refer to the Newbies/FAQ thread for some answers if they are unwilling to un-redact some of the required information.

Coupon-mad

severus90 said:

I also have some questions relating to potential supporting evidence.

I assume that a copy of the lease document giving the parking permissions would be good supporting evidence. I also assume that a witness statement from the relatives of the driver supporting the assertion that there was a valid permit, albeit one mistakenly displayed? 

Is there any other useful supporting evidence to consider?

No evidence goes with a defence.

You need to read the second post of the NEWBIES thread to understand when Witness Statement (WS) and evidence stage comes.

Save all this detail for your WS:

Unfortunately, due to the high wind speeds on the evening in question, the permit appears to have been blown over by the wind, in such a way that made it more difficult for the representative of REDACTED PARKING COMPANY to verify the permit details when they came to check the vehicle the following day.

Nonetheless, the driver was parked with the full permission of REDACTED, who have unconditional permissions in their lease to use their allocated spaces for the enjoyment of themselves and their visitors. There are no conditions within the lease document that require REDACTED, or permitted visitors to display a permit when using their allocated spaces. No other parties had permission from REDACTED to use the space on the dates in question, and therefore the inconvenience and loss arising as a result of the displaying of the permit was negligible.