Civil National Business Centre Claim form for parking in a retail park

razor1965

@Coupon-mad

IN THE COUNTY COURT

Claim No.:  ABC123

Between

UK BAD COMPANY NAME

(Claimant) 

- and -  

Abc123                        

 (Defendant)

_________________

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. 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. There is no record kept of who may or may not have been driving at this particular date and time given by the claimant.

 

3. The defendant has no knowledge whatsoever why the vehicle was in the claimed position/car park on the date provided. This is not a location frequented by the defendant. 

Coupon-mad

You'll need to add more. "Unlikely to be the driver" is NOT a defence. Surely you received a PCN?  You know something?   Didn't it only happen this year?

razor1965

I was NOT the driver. Yes I have a PCN and it happened in June (received the PCN through the post).

This is what I am asking about as to how to word my defence.

The particulars of claim are:
1. The defendant (D) is indebted to the claimant (C) for a parking charge(s) issued to vehicle ABC123X at KFC, High street, Anytown, A1 1XX
2. The PCN(s) were issued on xx/xx/2023
3. The defendant is pursued as the driver of the vehicle for breach of the terms on the signs (the contract). Reason: NO parking Out of Hours
4. In the alternative the defendant is pursued as the keeper pursuant to POFA 2012, schedule 4.
AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS:
1. £170 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 data hereof at a daily rate of £.02 until judgement or sooner payment.
3. Costs and court fees.

I'm really at a loss to word the defence, which is, I wasn't there.

Coupon-mad

No it's not.  That's not a defence.

Go back to the template defence and review what I say to put if you were not driving.

razor1965

Aw, I'm so sorry, I cannot see it. Which paragraph number is this in? I feel so thick

Coupon-mad

It's in the only bit that tells you what to put.

razor1965

Ok, I cannot find any guidance on what constitutes a defence for this. I was not driving this day and I cannot see what the guidance is for this. I don't have much choice on what I can include as a 'defence' apart from the excellent 'standard' text. Edited of course where needed. But ultimately, cannot find a 'defence'. Sorry @Coupon-mad

Coupon-mad

You can write about receiving the PCN or not.  You can add why you ignored the threatograms.  Of didn't receive any?

You can conclude from the timings on that PCN that it was dark (perhaps?) given it accuses the driver of parking 'out of hours'.

If it was night hours, what might a keeper say about the signs and lack of lighting?

Given that you can look on Google StreetView (even if you don't use the KFC) what conclusions can you allege about the lack of prominence of the signs, from what you can see on GSV?

You obviously need the word 'deny' which the Template tells you to put.