Received N1SDT claim form for private parking fine

Worzel_

I received the below N1SDT claim form from a ParkingEye fine that I ignored.

Can anyone help me with how to reply to it?

Thanks!

Redacted Letter:

KeithP

Hello and welcome.

With a Claim Issue Date of 12th February, you have until Monday 4th March to file an Acknowledgment of Service.  Do not file an Acknowledgment of Service before 17th February, but otherwise there is nothing to be gained by delaying it. 

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

Having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 18th March 2024 to file your Defence.

That's over 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 Acknowledgment of Service guidance.

Don't miss the deadline for filing an Acknowledgment of Service, nor that 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'.

KeithP

I wonder where that £120.00 came from?
Was it £120.00 on the car park sign or the Parking Charge Notice?
If not, where has it come from?

Worzel_

Hi,

Some more infor on the siutation:

[quote]A copy of the original Parking Charge Notice[/quote]

I don't have this, binned them  :-\ 

[quote]An explanation of the situation, i.e. the incident that gave rise to the charge being issued, and any reasons you think the money may not be owed[/quote]

The driver was not me, it was a family member who was visiting from Taiwan. He does not live in the UK and was just here staying with us.

[quote]Photos of the signage at the car park in question[/quote]

[quote]I wonder where that £120.00 came from?[/quote]

I'm not sure, don't have the PCN to check and not sure about the signs as I can't read it on Google Maps.

Not_A_Hope

You could name the driver and give their Taiwanese address for service which would transfer liability from you as the keeper. Good luck to ParkingEye chasing payment for a PCN in Taiwan

KeithP

Not_A_Hope said:

You could name the driver and give their Taiwanese address for service which would transfer liability from you as the keeper. Good luck to ParkingEye chasing payment for a PCN in Taiwan

Meanwhile, the OP has a County Court Claim to defend himself against.  

Worzel_

My son was choking on a sweet and we pulled into the hotel in an emergency. I didn't pay attention to signs etc as I was in too much a distressed state to notice.

Shall I acknowledge now and then write up a draft defence?

KeithP

Wait a minute...

You have just written...

Worzel_ said:

My son was choking on a sweet and I pulled into the hotel in an emergency.

That tells us that you were driving, but less than an hour earlier you told us...

Worzel_ said:

The driver was not me, it was a family member who was visiting from Taiwan. He does not live in the UK and was just here staying with us.

You need to decide who was driving at the time.

Coupon-mad

Not_A_Hope said:

You could name the driver and give their Taiwanese address for service which would transfer liability from you as the keeper. Good luck to ParkingEye chasing payment for a PCN in Taiwan

Should have done that before litigation.  Would have been easy to kill it off then.  Too late now.

The OP should state they were not the driver, at the end of the Template Defence para 2, then para 3 and 4 (INSTEAD of the template para 4 which could be replaced) could be:


3.  It is denied that a compliant Notice was given to the keeper Defendant making them liable for the claimed sum of £120.  A parking operator can only transfer liability to the keeper by complying with the strict requirements set out in Schedule 4 to the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (‘POFA’). The Defendant admits to being the registered keeper, denies being the driver and puts the Claimant to strict proof as to all facts alleged apart from the identity of the registered keeper. All of the applicable conditions under POFA Schedule 4 and all requirements of the 2020 BPA Code of Practice were not met.

4.  Further, the claimed amount of £120 is inflated. The POFA states that the creditor only has the right to recover from the keeper "so much of that amount as remains unpaid" which is stated on adequate signage and also on the Notice to Keeper.  Given that the BPA Code caps parking charges at £100 maximum - and no debt recovery firm or extra letters were involved in this case - the sum on the sign and NTK (which are both 'consumer notices') cannot have been £120.  The contract is void and/or unfair. The sum of £120 is unrecoverable from a keeper in any event, ref POFA Explanatory Notes, paragraph 121.

4.1.  It cannot pass the fairness test to offer an alleged contract at up to £100 then try to claim it at £120.  The court is reminded that 'terms' and 'consumer notices' must both be fair and prominent and courts must consider this (ref: Consumer Rights Act 2015, s71).  The signs do not create a contract to pay £120 plus court fees.  This issue alone - exaggerating the quantum and pretending (according to the POC as pleaded) that the keeper can be liable for a sum higher than the driver was faced with, and that the sum of £120 was on the contract when it was not - could be enough in itself to dismiss the claim.

Coupon-mad

The above was written when the OP told us they weren't driving.

We now have a different story.

Don't make anything up. Which is true?  

Worzel_

Coupon-mad said:

The above was written when the OP told us they weren't driving.

We now have a different story.

Don't make anything up. Which is true?  

Yes I mispoke previously. The family member was driving and my son was coughing/choking on a sweet.

Is it worth adding the choking info to my defence or is it irrelevent?

Thanks