I Park Services Parking Charge Strand St Whitehaven

Grizebeck

go to the MCOL website
Look at the transaction dates

KeithP

What is the Issue Date on your Claim Form?

KatAstrophe67

KeithP said:

What is the Issue Date on your Claim Form?

26th June 2024, I filed AoS today. Thank you

KeithP

KatAstrophe67 said:

KeithP said:

What is the Issue Date on your Claim Form?

26th June 2024, I filed AoS today. Thank you

With a Claim Issue Date of 26th June, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 29th July 2024 to file a Defence.

That's nearly three 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 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'.

KatAstrophe67

Thank you @KeithP, much appreciated.

Will update when I have drafted my defence.

KatAstrophe67

Good morning,

I have drafted my defence and would appreciate any feed back you are able to provide.

2. The facts in this defence come from the Defendant's own knowledge and honest belief.  Conversely, the Claimant sets out a cut-and-paste incoherent and sparse statement of case. The POC appear to be in breach of CPR 16.4, 16PD3 and 16PD7, and fail to "state all facts necessary for the purpose of formulating a complete cause of action". The Defendant is unable, on the basis of the POC, to understand with certainty what case, allegation(s) and what heads of cost are being pursued, making it difficult to respond. However, the vehicle is recognised and it is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver.

3. The vehicle in question is a long wheel base van, similar to a motorhome in length at 6.5 metres long. The Defendant entered the car park at 15:51 and left at 16:05, (Screenshot of Google Maps timeline history available) the car park was busy and it was not possible to park the vehicle in a suitable, single, space. The Defendant briefly stopped at the side of the car park and looked on their maps to see if they could see another car park in the area. The Defendant then had to wait for several cars to park before they could start making their way out of the car park. The entrance to the car park is narrow (there were cars parked in all the bays) and in order to manoeuvre to the exit the Defendant again had to wait for other vehicles to fully enter the car park so that they could manoeuvre safely.

The Defendant did not at any point leave the vehicle and was delayed leaving because of the positioning of the bays and the vehicle being a long vehicle with a small turning circle.

As the Defendant did not leave the vehicle, they were not able to see any signs other than those that are visible as you enter the car park, which simply state that it is a private land and ANPR/CCTV is in use. The remainder of the writing is too small to read whilst driving.

The ‘Particulars of Claim’ supplied by I Park Services state:

“The defendant is pursued as the driver of the vehicle for breach of the terms on the signs (the contract). Reason:Without A Valid Pay And Display (or Prepay Arrangement) (ANPR)”

The Defendant did not leave the vehicle and simply drove into the car park and drove out again and it is not possible to read the signs, mentioned in the Particulars of Claim, from a vehicle.

As an aside, the first letter I received in relation to this was a reminder notice, is this worth mentioning?

Many thanks for your assistance.

Kat

KatAstrophe67

In case it is of assitance, this is the PoC:

Particulars of Claim

1. The Defendant (D) is indebted to the Claimant (C) for a Parking Charge(s) issued to vehicle ******** at Strand ST, Whitehaven, CA28 7EN.

2. The PCN(s) were issued on 11/08/2023

3. The defendant is pursued as the driver of the vehicle for breach of the terms on the signs (the contract). Reason:Without A Valid Pay And Display (or Prepay Arrangement)

(ANPR)

4. In the alternative the defendant is pursued as the keeper pursuant to POFA 2012, Schedule 4.

AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS

1. £160 being the total of the PCN(s) and damages.

2. Interest at a rate of 8% per annum pursuant to s.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 from the date hereof at a daily rate of £.02 until judgment or sooner payment.

3. Costs and court fees

Thank you 

Gr1pr

The fact that the first letter was a reminder wont be needed 

Looks a reasonable draft of the template to me, but wait for other comments seeing as you have 10 days left, plus with the internet outages etc today, I would suggest that later next week is a better time for submissions anyway 

Trainerman

It is only a personal opinion, but I would leave out the "looking at maps" piece and concentrate on the "blocked from leaving" bit

KatAstrophe67

I have emended my defence as per the suggestions, is there any further advice before I email it as per the instructions?

3. The vehicle in question is a long wheel base van, similar to a motorhome in length at 6.5 metres long. The Defendant entered the car park at 15:51 and left at 16:05, (Screenshot of Google Maps timeline history available) the car park was busy and it was not possible to park the vehicle in a suitable, single, space. The Defendant had to wait for several cars to park before they could start making their way out of the car park. The entrance to the car park is narrow (there were cars parked in all the bays) and in order to manoeuvre to the exit the Defendant again had to wait for other vehicles to fully enter the car park so that they could manoeuvre safely.

The Defendant did not at any point leave the vehicle and was delayed leaving because of the positioning of the bays and the vehicle being a long vehicle with a small turning circle.

As the Defendant did not leave the vehicle, they were not able to see any signs other than those that are visible as you enter the car park, which simply state that it is a private land and ANPR/CCTV is in use. The remainder of the writing is too small to read whilst driving.

The ‘Particulars of Claim’ supplied by I Park Services state:

“The defendant is pursued as the driver of the vehicle for breach of the terms on the signs (the contract). Reason:Without A Valid Pay And Display (or Prepay Arrangement) (ANPR)”

The Defendant did not leave the vehicle and simply drove into the car park and drove out again and it is not possible to read the signs, mentioned in the Particulars of Claim, from a vehicle.

Many thanks for your continued assistance.

Kat