UPDATED - Dispute Resolution Hearing - An Outcome

Coupon-mad

I don't think the heads of cost are ever clear on any parking POC.  And this is always true:

"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". "

And it would be madness not to explain to the Judge why PPCs cannot add £70. Your case is just as much about that as it is about the original PCN.

FIVE HUNDRED & TEN POUNDS for 3x PCNs (before any court fees are added)?  They are having a laugh. You should be hopping mad about that extortion attempt!

Leave it ALL in. DLUHC commentary et al

Pcyuljr1

Thanks @Coupon-mad , I'll leave it all in and add my defence points.

I think my anger reached it's limit when I got two tickets through the post within a week. I was fuming! Then the third came a couple of weeks and it became a little ridiculous and battle commenced.

You previously mentioned about recognising the place I had parked in. You probably won't remember the outcomes of those, but do you have pointers of how I'd search for the same previous cases on the forum?

Coupon-mad

There was one thread, last year. I recognised the photo immediately as it's unusual.

Try searching the forum for the name of the main road or the business on site, plus the acronym VCS or plus the word 'parking'.

You'll find it.

Pcyuljr1

Mr/Mrs/Ms @Coupon-mad are you there?

I'm still having a search around and found the case below that you assisted with a couple of years back. It appears very similar to mine - VCS and DCB Legal, three parking tickets and a similar (not the same) sign. In this case, the OP attended court (I'm surprised DCB Legal went that far?) and had two ticket claims rejected but got stung for £400 on the third one. Are you aware of anything changing since then that may assist me?

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6377958/letter-of-claim-dcb-legal-in-behalf-of-vcs/p4

Whilst searching I also found mention of a 'forbidding sign' - I feel mine would fit into this category but I'm unsure if this is worth mentioning in a DS.

The sign is placed on an entry gate - a big part of my defence is that the wording strongly implies that passing the gate and 'entering this private land' (as opposed to 'having already entered this private' land) is what will incur a charge. Not parking on the roadside of the fence.

1505grandad

FYI  -  C-m is a Lady

Coupon-mad

That link is about a different place.  I said to search the forum for the name of the main road plus VCS because I recall the person telling us the name or number of the A road.

I'm Mrs 

  

LDast

Why not add this after para #1 in your defence:

Preliminary Matter. The claim should be struck out

2. The Claim should be struck out on the basis that it contravenes Schedule 4, Paragraph 4(5) of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA). PoFA clearly stipulates that a creditor may not make a claim against the keeper of a vehicle for more than the amount of the unpaid parking charges as they stood when the notice to the driver was issued. The original Parking Charge Notice (PCN) issued by the claimant was for £100. The claimant's current claim is for £170, which exceeds the amount of the unpaid parking charges as stated in the original notice. The claimant’s attempt to claim an unlawful amount constitutes an abuse of process and should not be allowed to proceed. I respectfully request the allocating judge to dismiss the claim on the basis of the claimant’s contravention of Schedule 4, Paragraph 4(5) of PoFA and thereby CPR 1.1, CPR 3.4(2)(a) and (b) and CPR 27.14 and to award costs to the defendant for having to defend against this improper claim.

Pcyuljr1

LDast said:

Why not add this after para #1 in your defence:

Preliminary Matter. The claim should be struck out

2. The Claim should be struck out on the basis that it contravenes Schedule 4, Paragraph 4(5) of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA). PoFA clearly stipulates that a creditor may not make a claim against the keeper of a vehicle for more than the amount of the unpaid parking charges as they stood when the notice to the driver was issued. The original Parking Charge Notice (PCN) issued by the claimant was for £100. The claimant's current claim is for £170, which exceeds the amount of the unpaid parking charges as stated in the original notice. The claimant’s attempt to claim an unlawful amount constitutes an abuse of process and should not be allowed to proceed. I respectfully request the allocating judge to dismiss the claim on the basis of the claimant’s contravention of Schedule 4, Paragraph 4(5) of PoFA and thereby CPR 1.1, CPR 3.4(2)(a) and (b) and CPR 27.14 and to award costs to the defendant for having to defend against this improper claim.

Will do - thanks for the tip.

Pcyuljr1

Coupon-mad said:

That link is about a different place.  I said to search the forum for the name of the main road plus VCS because I recall the person telling us the name or number of the A road.

I'm Mrs 

  

Yes, I found the one you meant in the end. I just thought the other one I found may also be relevant due to it's huge similarities.

Regarding the one you meant, I did find it eventually and discovered that the thread just tailed off prior to a resolution. Rather than clog the board up with more active posts, I've messaged the OP in the hope they can provide an outcome. I'm hoping it was dropped prior to court, in keeping with what I've read about DCB Legal in all but one thread.

It was interesting that the poster of the thread determined the access road was an 'unadopted road' according to the plans. This doesn't technically make it private land I don't think (struggling to find categoric legislation) and thus enforcement of parking tickets by claiming it is private may be difficult - hence my defence will argue that the land isn't private and the onus will then be on them to prove it is so. They may be able to, but it's another little thing to chip away at maybe?

Gotta keep the battle going for us all! 😊

Pcyuljr1

Just to update, I have now submitted my defence to the court and received the automated response, which takes me to step 6 of the 12.

Of note, when receiving my automated response, it contained the following;

When sending us documents please ensure you comply with the Practice Direction 5B

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part05/pd_part05b

One such requirement is; 

I assume nobody has ever been picked up on this, but wonder if it is worth adding to the guidance just in case?

What do you reckon @Coupon-mad