Secure Parking DCB Legal court claim 2025

Pcngone

@Coupon-mad

and this was there response 

Your complaint about POPLA case 8452793013

 

Thank you for your email received 5 June 2024, outlining the reasons why you are unhappy with the decision that has been reached by the assessor in your appeal. This was passed to me by the POPLA team as I am responsible for investigating complaints.

 

It is worth pointing out that before submitting an appeal, our website informs appellants that POPLA is a one-stage appeal service, and we cannot reconsider your appeal if you disagree with our decision.

 

You advise the assessor has stated the Notice to Keeper is complaint with the Protection of Freedoms Act (POFA) which you state it is not. 

 

Paragraph 9(2)e of POFA states ‘’ state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper— (i)to pay the unpaid parking charges; or (ii)if the keeper was not the driver of the vehicle, to notify the creditor of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and to pass the notice on to the driver”.

 

Secure Parking Solutions provided a copy of the Notice to Keeper. On reviewing this, it states: “If you were not the driver, you should tell us the name and current postal address of the driver and pass this notice to them”. See below:

 

 

The Notice to Keeper was issued within 14 days of the parking event therefore, the operator has met the strict requirements set out in POFA.

 

 

Having reviewed both the appeal and your complaint, I am satisfied the decision reached is appropriate, based on the evidence presented. 

 

I am sorry that your experience of using our service has not been positive. However, POPLA’s involvement in your appeal has now ended, and this response concludes our complaints process. It will not be appropriate for us to correspond further on this matter and all further correspondence will be noted on your case, but not responded to.

LDast

I'd reply to that and ask where is the compliance with PoFA 9(2)(e)(i)? Nowhere in their response have they answered that. Nowhere in the NtK and especially in the paragraph shown is there any "invitation" or even any synonym of that word, to the keeper to pay the charge. 

Tell the them that they obviously need more training in what the requirements of complying with PoFA mean. Tell them that in order to be PoFA compliant, the NtK has to comply with ALL the requirements of the Act. It does not mean "partly" or even "substantially" but it means "fully" comply.

If the assessor and the person responsible for dealing with complaints cannot understand that then how can they be trusted to assess any appeal correctly.

I'd also write to your MP (once you know who it is after the election) and ask them to intervene with POPLA as they have tried to shut you off even though they did not cover the reason for your original complaint.

Pcngone

LDast said:

I'd reply to that and ask where is the compliance with PoFA 9(2)(e)(i)? Nowhere in their response have they answered that. Nowhere in the NtK and especially in the paragraph shown is there any "invitation" or even any synonym of that word, to the keeper to pay the charge. 

Tell the them that they obviously need more training in what the requirements of complying with PoFA mean. Tell them that in order to be PoFA compliant, the NtK has to comply with ALL the requirements of the Act. It does not mean "partly" or even "substantially" but it means "fully" comply.

If the assessor and the person responsible for dealing with complaints cannot understand that then how can they be trusted to assess any appeal correctly.

I'd also write to your MP (once you know who it is after the election) and ask them to intervene with POPLA as they have tried to shut you off even though they did not cover the reason for your original complaint.

 They claim it states: “If you were not the driver, you should tell us the name and current postal address of the driver and pass this notice to them” and it does state this on the ntk however if we have to comply word for word with Paragraph 9(2)e of POFA which states ‘’ state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver’ then they haven’t done this 

Coupon-mad

Yes but there's really no point complaining again to the useless POPLA.

Pcngone

Hi guys, 

so a follow up from this. After ignoring the debt letters I have no been presented with a claim form as shown below:

So I am about to complete my acknowledgment of service  as detailed in the newbies thread and then draft up my defence to send via email. Will be using the defence template. My question is where I am to include some of my own points in paragraph 3, can I just use all of the points from my defence that I appealed to popla with regarding unclear signs etc?

KeithP

With a Claim Issue Date of 28th January, you have until Monday 17th February 2025 to file an Acknowledgment of Service('AOS'), but there is nothing to be gained by delaying it. 

To file an AOS, follow the guidance in the Dropbox file linked from the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Having filed an AOS in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 3rd March 2025 to file a Defence.

That's almost four weeks away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence, but please don't leave it to the last minute.

To create a Defence, and then file a Defence by email, look again at the second post on the NEWBIES thread - immediately following where you found the AOS guidance.

Don't miss the deadline for filing an AOS, nor that for filing a Defence.

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

Coupon-mad

Pcngone said:

Hi guys, 

so a follow up from this. After ignoring the debt letters I have no been presented with a claim form as shown below:

So I am about to complete my acknowledgment of service  as detailed in the newbies thread and then draft up my defence to send via email. Will be using the defence template. My question is where I am to include some of my own points in paragraph 3, can I just use all of the points from my defence that I appealed to popla with regarding unclear signs etc?

Nope, the Template Defence already covers 'unclear signs' lower down.

Para 3 in your case should be:


3.  Referring to the POC: paragraph 1 is denied. The Defendant is not indebted to the Claimant. Paragraph 2 is denied. No PCN was "issued on 05/09/2023" (the date of the alleged visit).  Whilst the Defendant is the registered keeper, paragraphs 3 and 4 are denied. The Defendant is not liable and has seen no evidence of a breach of prominent terms.  The quantum is hugely exaggerated (no PCN can be £170 on private land) and there were no damages incurred whatsoever. The interest is exaggerated and appears to have been calculated on the extortionate total of £170, which cannot have been 'overdue' on 'the date hereof' (if that is intended to mean from 05/09/2023). The Claimant is put to strict proof of their heads of cost and all allegations.

3.1 The POC pleads that the purported contract breach is for ‘Reason : Unauthorised vehicle’. The Defendant has no idea about that term and no idea what 'relevant obligation', the driver at the time are supposed to have breached. This was not even made clear when the Defendant appealed. Nevertheless, nothing of value is offered to 'non-authorised' drivers by the phrase relied upon in the POC. Therefore, in the absence of consideration from this parking operator, no contractual 'meeting of minds' was possible and the only possible claim would be by the landowner, under the tort of trespass (not pleaded).  As found by DJ Iyer at Manchester Court, in PACE v Lengyel.

Pcngone

Hi guys, 

Firstly thanks for all your help and apologies for the delay in response. I have now submitted my AOS and currently drafting up the defence including the paras advised by @Coupon-mad. Are these two personalised points enough or should i be including anything else you think might be relevant to the case? 

As stated in the defence template 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 actual reason why the car was parked here was because my sister was visiting a carpet shop and in previous years before the introduction of the supposed parking management this is where people park. Should i really be including this as the reason to why the car was there in the first place?

Also as i was the not the driver of the vehicle should i adapt para 2 to being the keeper only. My sister was the the driver but should i act as the driver? or does it actually matter to state that i wasnt the driver?

Le_Kirk

Your defence paragraphs to slip into the template have been written for you by @Coupon-mad; I would not change or embellish them.

Pcngone

Le_Kirk said:

Your defence paragraphs to slip into the template have been written for you by @Coupon-mad; I would not change or embellish them.

Perfect, I shall not add anything and send as is. Also in regards to para 2 about identifying myself as the keeper only or driver also, Does it matter(