Excel Parking, Derby - about to prepare defence

sooty86

Coupon-mad said:

Yes leave all the mentions of generic POC in because the POC is generic!

Well, when you put it like that!

Thanks @Coupon-mad. Any thoughts on the defence wording, anyone?

Coupon-mad

The facts known to the Defendant:

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".

3. 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 and why, making it difficult to respond.  Even when the Defendant appealed this charge months ago, the dispute was rejected out of hand as "appealed too late" and there was no explanation of why the Claimant was (incorrectly) suggesting that no payment was made.

4.  The POC fail to properly identify the location or town; merely a street name which is not private land. It is denied that the vehicle was parked in 'the Copeland Street' (public highway).  Further, the POC fail to mention any quantum at all, let alone break it down into heads of cost.  The claim is for £170 which is far higher than the maximum (industry capped) sum for a parking charge and is wholly disproportionate.  It is denied that this Claimant is entitled to the unquantified 'parking charge, contractual costs and interest' that the POC vaguely mentions at the end, nor any sum at all.

5. The VRM in the POC is recognised and it is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver.  The Defendant was visiting "Jumpin' Fun" Inflatable Park with their seven-year-old child to attend a birthday party.  On arriving at the car park, the Defendant found it to be near capacity and was unable to locate a parking space for several minutes.  The Defendant pulled over to assist their child to alight and enter Jumpin Fun for the party (taking their child inside the premises and ensuring other adults were supervising the children) before going back outside to ensure they were correctly parked in a bay and then join the queue at the payment machine. 

6. Setting down/escorting a child passenger into premises is not part of any 'parking period', as confirmed in the incoming statutory Parking Code of Practice linked later in this defence. At  '2.24 parking period' the Government helpfully defines this as:

"the length of time that a vehicle has been parked, i.e. left stationary otherwise than in the course of driving, after any relevant consideration period has expired (excluding instances where the driver has stopped to enable passengers to leave or enter the vehicle). This is not the period between a vehicle being recorded as entering and departing controlled land."

7. Accordingly it is denied that "the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer". In a pay & display site, entry in moving traffic cannot be the moment when a parking contract begins. It cannot possibly be concluded prior to parking and before the motorist was given the opportunity to read the terms, and either accept or reject them. This view is supported by case law and incoming statute. The Defendant relies upon paragraph 5 of the incoming statutory Parking Code of Practice and upon the authority in National Car Parks v HMRC [2019] EWCA Civ 854 (20 May 2019) where it was held by the Court of Appeal that the contract with a paying patron in a Pay & Display car park is brought into being "when the green button was pressed".

8.  It is denied that the vehicle was parked without purchasing a valid pay & display ticket.  Having parked after dropping off their passenger, the Defendant discovered that the ticket machine was not accepting card payments and there was a queue building up. The sum paid by the Defendant (in cash) covered the duration of parking. Any breach is denied.

I suggest the above. Then the rest of the template defence, renumbered.

sooty86

Defence submitted today, by email to CCBC AQ, and auto response received. Thank you for the excellent advice so far.

thisistheworst

I am in a freakishly similar case so it's quite handy you posted so much detail, thanks. Same date, car park and contravention (grace period), so I will be following along and adapting your defence. Strength in numbers!

sooty86

Glad you have found the thread useful @thisistheworst . I certainly would have been lost without the guidance from this forum!

I have just received a copy of Excel's completed N180 Directions questionnaire, and a letter from the CNBC requesting me to complete my own, which I have done. I'll keep this thread updated.

Zee_Man

Hi,

I cannot find the template defence 

KeithP

Zee_Man said:

Hi,

I cannot find the template defence 

A link to the NEWBIES thread...

**NEWBIES!! PRIVATE PARKING TICKET? OLD OR NEW? **READ THESE FAQS FIRST!** Thankyou!

Please start a new thread if you need further help with your predicament.

Coupon-mad

Zee_Man said:

Hi,

I cannot find the template defence 

You can because (even without KeithP giving you a link) you already had a link back to page one, on every page. In fact there are two.

Please slow down - this is easier than you think - and see my signature, below, which tells you how to easily navigate the forum yourself without extra links being provided.

Lacman

I am preparing a defence against anticipated court proceedings by Excel Parking in relation to a PCN issued because I had entered an incorrect registered number when paying for the parking. These companies are self regulated and as can be seen from posts hereon act in an unscrupulous manner an do not apply any flexibility.  I not the previous post regarding this issue was in 2023 are there any updates or further information that I should be aware of.

Le_Kirk

If you want up-to-date information and advice, I suggest you start your own thread with all the details (except personal stuff) and you will get bespoke advice rather than posting on someone else's thread.