Several DCBL Letters received. Now at WS stage. Help Needed! (Updated Thread Title)

Capana

Le_Kirk said:

Capana said:

Le_Kirk said:

Capana said:

1. Driver got PCN for parking at a hospital that they normally park at to pick up passengers while working as a private hire driver.

What did PALS at the hospital do/say when you complained?

Who are Pals? And I didn't complain to, I guess, the relevant body.

Also in the newbies section it says you can only complain before the claim form stage. Unless I'm mistaken. 

I would have thought that someone who picks up and delivers patients to a hospital would have been aware of the Patient Advice and Liaison Service.

The driver of the vehicle works as private hire driver and doesn't specifically pick up people from hospitals. Pick up locations are wherever the customer requests.

Also PALS isn't mentioned, to my knowledge, in the TFL handbook for private hire drivers which they're advised to read.

Capana

nopcns said:

Capana said:

What do you mean by this - "any signs stating "No parking or waiting at any time" are prohibitive" and why does that stop a contact from being formed?

Should I include this in my defence section above?

There are four essential elements of forming a contract: offer, acceptance, consideration, and intention to create legal relations. Beyond this, the terms of the contract must also be unambiguous, and the parties must have the mental capacity to agree.

Does "No parking or waiting at any time" offer anything? If you agree that it doesn't, how can a contract have been formed that they are now alleging you breached?

Thanks for clarify. It makes sense what you said.

So is the offer not taken in the Literal sense as in "No waiting" meaning if you wait you breached the offer(as in some sort of rule) of "No waiting"

Unless I'm thinking about it in the wrong way.

Le_Kirk

Were you waiting, in that your car was stopped for more than a couple of minutes or were you in the act of picking up/setting down in that someone was getting in or out of your car?  Loading/unloading is not parking/waiting.

nopcns

Capana said:

So is the offer not taken in the Literal sense as in "No waiting" meaning if you wait you breached the offer(as in some sort of rule) of "No waiting"

Unless I'm thinking about it in the wrong way.

What do the PoC on the claim say? You are being sued for allegedly breaching the terms of "(the contract)". What you have said is that the only signs you saw were "No Waiting". Based on what the definition of a "contract" is, how can you have breached a contract if no contract was there to be agreed to in the first place?

Capana

Le_Kirk said:

Were you waiting, in that your car was stopped for more than a couple of minutes or were you in the act of picking up/setting down in that someone was getting in or out of your car?  Loading/unloading is not parking/waiting.

The driver was picking up a passenger. Would that be considered loading as a private hire driver or does it have to be goods?

nopcns said:

Capana said:

So is the offer not taken in the Literal sense as in "No waiting" meaning if you wait you breached the offer(as in some sort of rule) of "No waiting"

Unless I'm thinking about it in the wrong way.

What do the PoC on the claim say? You are being sued for allegedly breaching the terms of "(the contract)". What you have said is that the only signs you saw were "No Waiting". Based on what the definition of a "contract" is, how can you have breached a contract if no contract was there to be agreed to in the first place?

I understand.

I appreciate the feedback in helping me understand the PoC and the alleged breach of contact.

However, I'm getting quite concerned now as I only have 3 days left to submit my defence and I still don't know if what I've written is suitable for parts 2 and 3. I will use the rest from the template.

Here's my updated defence:

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 and driver.

3. The Defendant was parked on site at St Thomas Hospital, London, SE1 7EH to pick up a passenger from the normal pick up location whilst working as a Private Hire Driver.
The location the Defendant used to stop is and has been used by all Private Hire Drivers for a very long time without any issues or warnings.
That coupled with the guidelines TFL provide to Private Hire Drivers which states that Private Hire Drivers can stop on double red lines to pick up passengers within a reasonable time frame led the Defendant to assume it to be okay to stop there.
It was a rainy and wet day and the defendant didn’t notice any signs stating there would be any breach to stop there.

4. The Defendant believes the reasoning behind the alleged breach of the terms of "the contact" to be ambiguous and misleading because in order for a contact to be formed with the Defendant there has to be an offer. Considering "No Parking Or Waiting At Anytime" doesn't satisfy that. There couldn't of been any alleged breach.



Is this okay?

Coupon-mad

Change 'couldn't of' ( = not English) to:

could not have


And add this and renumber the template:

5.  The Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities ('DLUHC') published in February 2022, a Private Parking Code of Practice which is finally incoming this year.  It intends to end rogue practice and bring parking on private land within similar fairness and 'exempt activity' parameters as apply to on-street rules. It includes the following two fundamental definitions (which stood unchallenged as part of the Judicial Reviews that have delayed the Code) and clarifies unequivocally that dropping off or picking up a passenger is not considered parking.  So important is this rule - to reflect the same exemption as has always been applied by Local Authorities - that it is stated twice: 

"2.19 parked/parking

an instance of a vehicle being caused by the driver to remain stationary other than in the course of driving (excluding instances where the driver has stopped to enable passengers leave or enter the vehicle).

2.24 parking period

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)."

nopcns

3. The Defendant was parked waiting on site at St Thomas Hospital, London, SE1 7EH to pick up a passenger from the normal pick up location whilst working as a Private Hire Driver.

You may want to amend the bit above.

Le_Kirk

Ha, @nopcns you beat me to it!

1505grandad

".....passengers within a reasonable time frame led the Defendant to assume it to be okay to stop there."

Perhaps also applies to this  -  "to wait there"? (elsewhere also)

Coupon-mad

Do not use the word 'assume'.