MCOL Defense UK CPM

JustSay

Firstly, can I just say thank you for providing such a comprehensive resource. I have been reading this forum for days and I wish I had discovered it sooner.

I have until 04 September to submit my defence, which I have drafted using the information and template in the NEWBIES thread and will paste my edited section in para. 3 below. I will file this in good time via email and not the online portal.

Sadly, the incident happened in an area hours away from where I live and it was not practical to return there easily. As the PCN was issued by post rather than stuck on the windscreen I did not take any photographs of the signage prior to leaving. I have been back recently and discovered that a new car park operator has replaced UK CPM at this site with an entirely different parking arrangement.

In a nutshell, it was an underground public car park with no barriers and a pay machine near the vehicle exit. It was a pre-paid pay and display system where you guess your maximum time and display a ticket. A massive sign by the pay machine that said '4 hours free parking' was the only readable font from the location of the parked car. The reason for the PCN is 'not displaying a valid permit', i.e. there was a requirement to use the pay machine to obtain a ticket even if your period of stay was within the free period. I believe this to be an unusual arrangement. As the large sign meant my stay would be not requiring payment, it, as far as I was concerned, meant there was no reason to approach the payment machine.

The restaurant we were visiting warned us of this system and asked if we had displayed a ticket. I returned to the payment machine and followed the instructions on its screen to get a ticket and displayed it on the dashboard. However, a few days later I receive a PCN in the post for the period of time it was not displayed.

The defence is as follows:

"3. On DATE, the Defendant parked the vehicle bearing registration number XXX in the XXX car park. A large sign near the pay machine stated that there were ‘4 hours free parking’. This was in a large font which was easy to read from a distance. The Claimant alleges that the Defendant breached the terms and conditions of the car park for the reason of ‘not displaying a valid permit’. The car park in question is open to the public and was operated a pre-paid pay and display arrangement where customers pay for a maximum stay period in advance. However, the Defendant knew for certain that they would not be exceeding the free period, and therefore did not approach the payment machine.

 

The terms ‘pay and display’ imply that a ticket is required along with payment. The requirement to approach the pay machine and obtain a ticket for the free period was not adequately signed and it would be expected that the requirement to use the payment machine to obtain a ticket for a free period would be readable at the same distance as the large ‘4 hours free parking’ which can be read from the area where the vehicle is parked. The requirement to display a permit for this free period from the payment machine was not readable from this distance and the payment machine area would have had to be approached to discover this, which the large ‘4 hours free parking’ sign discourages the need for. The pedestrian exit to the car park does not require walking past any signage which clearly marks the requirement of a ticket for the free period nor does it require walking past the payment machines, which are located near the vehicle entrance and exit. Had the large sign stating ‘4 hours free parking’ not been on display, it would have been necessary to approach the payment machine to find the payment terms of the car park. Therefore, the presence of this sign and the absence of the requirement to display a permit for the free duration that can be read from the parking bays means that the Defendant was misled. Furthermore, the absence of barriers and the presence of a manned office by the vehicle entrance causes further confusion, as there will be no ticket required to exit the car park and there are staff members which can monitor stay periods.

The staff at the restaurant the Defendant was visiting knew that this car park arrangement was atypical and misleading, as, without prompt, they notified the Defendant’s party of the need to get a ticket for the free period. At this point the defendant returned to the vehicle XXXX and approached the payment machine to print a ticket. This was then displayed on the dashboard for the duration of the stay.

The total length of stay in the car park was 2 hours 6 minutes, which the Defendant can evidence."

My question is, in your opinion is this adequate? I want to do my best to make UK CPM retreat with their tail between their legs.

Many thanks

JustSay

Apologies for the typo of Defense instead of Defence in the thread title. 

KeithP

Hello and welcome.

What is the Issue Date on your County Court Claim Form?

Have you filed an Acknowledgment of Service?
If so, upon what date did you do so?
Your MCOL Claim History will have the definitive answer to that.

JustSay

Issue date was the 03 August and Acknowledge of Service was filed online on the 05 August. 

B789

Welcome. What is the "date of issue" on your claim form? Which unregulated private parking company issued the charge?

What exactly do the PoC on your claim for state? Your example above is far too long and reads like War & Peace. Better to just answer what the allegation is on the PoC and expand later at Witness Statement time.

If the PoC are the usual vague, ambiguous generic rubbish we usually see, there is no point doing the Claimants job for them and fleshing it out. It is their job to prove whatever it is they are ambiguously alleging in their scant PoC.

A simple statement that you were a patron nearby and any signage was ambiguous or misleading. Let the scammers flesh out their claim and you will add whatever is necessary in your WS. The rest of the defence template more than covers everything else that can be added to your WS.

KeithP

JustSay said:

Issue date was the 03 August and Acknowledge of Service was filed online on the 05 August. 

With a Claim Issue Date of 3rd August, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service 7th August (5th August was a Saturday so AoS was filed on the next working day), you have until 4pm on Monday 4th September 2023 to file your Defence.

That's one week away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence and it is good to see that you are not leaving it to the last minute.

To create a Defence, and then file a Defence by email, look at the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Don't miss the deadline for filing a Defence.

Do not try and file a Defence via the MoneyClaimOnline website. Once an Acknowledgment of Service has been filed, the MCOL website should be treated as 'read only'.

Coupon-mad

Does Google Streetview show the place & lack of signs from that year? You can't do it on a phone but if looking on a PC or laptop, GSV has a little arrow to change the image date back.

JustSay

B789 said:

Welcome. What is the "date of issue" on your claim form? Which unregulated private parking company issued the charge?

What exactly do the PoC on your claim for state? Your example above is far too long and reads like War & Peace. Better to just answer what the allegation is on the PoC and expand later at Witness Statement time.

If the PoC are the usual vague, ambiguous generic rubbish we usually see, there is no point doing the Claimants job for them and fleshing it out. It is their job to prove whatever it is they are ambiguously alleging in their scant PoC.

A simple statement that you were a patron nearby and any signage was ambiguous or misleading. Let the scammers flesh out their claim and you will add whatever is necessary in your WS. The rest of the defence template more than covers everything else that can be added to your WS.

That's really useful, thanks. I am new to this and you have shown me the difference between the roles of the defence statement and the witness statement. So, in the former, I am better to hold cards close to my chest but answer the allegation in para. 3, whilst using the rest of the template in the Newbies thread as it is written. Then, later, flesh it out in the witness statement when that time comes.

The PoC was very generic. It essentially states that the vehicle was 'parked without a valid permit and therefore in breach of contract'. By permit they mean printing out a free ticket to display from the pay machine, the car park is a public one.

JustSay

KeithP said:

JustSay said:

Issue date was the 03 August and Acknowledge of Service was filed online on the 05 August. 

With a Claim Issue Date of 3rd August, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service 7th August (5th August was a Saturday so AoS was filed on the next working day), you have until 4pm on Monday 4th September 2023 to file your Defence.

That's one week away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence and it is good to see that you are not leaving it to the last minute.

To create a Defence, and then file a Defence by email, look at the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Don't miss the deadline for filing a Defence.

Do not try and file a Defence via the MoneyClaimOnline website. Once an Acknowledgment of Service has been filed, the MCOL website should be treated as 'read only'.

Thanks for the confirmation re: the timings. I have used the template on the Newbies thread in its entirity and then the original post was the part in para 3 to edit.

I will reduce my section down to a more basic version and re-post again. 

Coupon-mad said:

Does Google Streetview show the place & lack of signs from that year? You can't do it on a phone but if looking on a PC or laptop, GSV has a little arrow to change the image date back.

Sadly it's an underground car park and no streetview images are available. I can't tell you how many searches online on this and similar websites I've done, as well as looking up images people have posted on Google reviews etc., hoping there would be one photo of the signage. Unfortunately not. I assume UK CPM will have a copy of the signage to produce as evidence so I am banking on that.

Coupon-mad

If this is a Gladstobes claim with interest added at 10.25%, search the forum for Gladstones 10.25% interest.

B789

JustSay said:

Sadly it's an underground car park and no streetview images are available. I can't tell you how many searches online on this and similar websites I've done, as well as looking up images people have posted on Google reviews etc., hoping there would be one photo of the signage. Unfortunately not. I assume UK CPM will have a copy of the signage to produce as evidence so I am banking on that.

No you aren't... which is exactly why you don't do the Claimant's job for them. They probably don't have any actual pictures of the signage at the actual location and can probably only provide a stock sample of one of their signs. That is not proof of the actual signage at the location on the date of the alleged contravention and they will be put to strict proof to provide images of the actual signage on the date. Hence, just answer the PoC and let them do all the work.