Support with Defence - Claim Form

Francesca1734

I would be very grateful for any support relating to issuing my Defence, having recently recieved the Claim Form from DCB Legal Ltd. 

I have found the extremely helpful thread titled "Template defence to adapt for all parking cases with added 'admin/DRA' costs - edited 31st July 2023", but I am seeking some clarity on how to put my best foot forward in the personal defence section (3). 

Unfortunately, I found this MSE forum only after submitting my initial rejection of the claim and subsequent appeal to POPLA. I am wondering, therefore, how much of the preceding context should be included in the defence. The context is as follows:

- The fine was issued for parking at the local Pure Gym, in "breach of the terms on the sign". I defended the claim, informing them I was a member of this gym and sharing my membership details along with a log of my gym attendance, which shows me at the gym on the date of the fine. They responded, acknowledging this and offering to reduce the fee to £20.00 to cover administrative costs. 

"The Charge was issued and the signage is displayed in compliance with The British Parking Association’s Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice and all relevant laws and regulations. Clear signs advise all drivers of the need to pay for parking when using this site, apart from Pure Gym members who are required to enter their vehicle registration on the touchscreen console inside the gym on each visit.           
   

On this occasion only we will accept the reduced amount of £20.00 in full settlement of this Charge to cover our administrative costs in correctly issuing this Charge and we will hold the charge at this rate for 14 days from the date of this correspondence, after which the Charge will revert to the full amount."

I appealed to POPLA because this £20 fee did not seem suitable, given that I had the right to park, as they acknowledged. POPLA rejected the appeal. I wrote to Nexus, asking them to update the payment link and conceding that I would have to pay the £20 fine.

They responded that "the administration fee of £20 offered for 14 days from the date of the rejection as part of the internal appeals process which you rejected as you appealed further externally to POPLA. As an appeal was made to POPLA and the decision was found in our favour, you lost the opportunity to pay the Charge at the admin and reduced rate. 

In the event that payment of the outstanding amount of £100 is not received before 23 October 2023, we can confirm that this case will escalate accordingly, and further action will be taken."

I am inclined to include the following points in my defence, under section three, but wanted to ask if any of the incredible helpful experts on here had a view. My proposed points are as follows:

Right to Park as a Gym Member The defendant was a member of Pure Gym Bath at the time of the alleged incident, which entitled them to park at the location. The defendant provided evidence of their right to park by submitting gym membership details and a visual proof of their gym log, indicating their presence at the gym on the date in question.

Disproportionate Charge and Administrative Fees The initial response from the claimant offered a reduced fee of £20 to cover administrative costs, recognizing the defendant's right to park as a gym member. This offer demonstrates that the full charge of £170 is disproportionate and primarily punitive, rather than reflective of actual losses or damages incurred by the claimant.

Claimant’s Lack of Loss or Damages The claimant has not demonstrated any genuine pre-estimate of loss or actual damages incurred due to my parking. The excessive charge of £170 is punitive and not representative of any real loss suffered by the claimant.


Thank you all for the extensive, helpful volume of information about how to tackle these dishonourable parking agents, and for your help with my case. I'm very grateful.

DE_612183

Have you asked Pure Gym to contact the PPC and ask them to cancel the invoice?

KeithP

Hello and welcome.

What is the Issue Date on your Claim Form?

Have you filed an Acknowledgment of Service?
If so, upon what date did you do so?
Your MCOL Claim History will have the definitive answer to that.

Francesca1734

Hi @KeithP,

Thank you for your help. The issue date is 12 June 2024, and I have filed the acknowledgement of service today (28 June 2024).

KeithP

Francesca1734 said:

The issue date is 12 June 2024, and I have filed the acknowledgement of service today (28 June 2024).

With a Claim Issue Date of 12th June, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 15th July 2024 to file your Defence.

That's over two 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 at the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Don't miss the deadline 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'.

Can you please show us a picture of the Particulars of Claim - with personal detail hidden of course.

Francesca1734

Thank you, Keith. I've seen the thread and it is very helpful. In particular, I'm looking to understand based on expert advice from contributors such as yourself, if, under point 3. "[EXPLAIN IN YOUR OWN WORD]" if I should reference the point about Nexus previously conceding that I had a right to park, and reducing the fee to only £20 for administration, to highlight how preposterous this is - that they actively acknowledge I was OK to park, and that the fee they allowed was just £20, compared to then a preposterous £100 after POPLA rejected my appeal on the £20? Gratefully, Francesca
(Image removed by Forum Team)

Coupon-mad

No don't go into detail because you are obviously using the alternative defence first paragraphs, linked within the 3rd paragraph of the Template Defence itself.

KeithP

To reinforce @Coupon-mad's point...
 
You need to be aware that those Particulars of Claim are totally inadequate.
Particularly this bit...

So it is alleged that the driver 'breached the terms on the signs (the contract)'.

And that allegation is then repeated - 'Reason: Vehicle Remained On Private Property In Breach Of The Prominently Displayed Terms And Conditions'.

Nowhere in those Particulars is there any explanation of what the driver is alleged to have done wrong.

This will be an easy win.

Francesca1734

Thank you, Keith and Coupon Mad. That's a great help.

For para three, to clarify, should I, therefore, state the following: "The defendant was a member of Pure Gym Bath at the time of the alleged incident, which entitled them to park at the location. The defendant can provide evidence of this." 

Or opt for an alternative approach?

From - https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6108153/suggested-template-defence-to-adapt-for-all-parking-charge-cases-where-they-add-false-admin-costs/p1

"3. [EXPLAIN IN YOUR OWN WORDS...NB: defences are written in the THIRD person as 'the Defendant', not 'I did this' nor 'my/me']. 

Say why the car was there - if you know - but don't answer to details that are not stated in the PARTICULARS OF CLAIM. If you didn't get any letters or it was years ago & you can't recall if you were driving, say that.  ONLY IF TRUE.

Most claims do not even state the alleged breach. If yours doesn't state what the breach was, add the paragraphs and judgments seen in the defence by @hharry100  here:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/80343627/#Comment_80343627"

Castle

There's a VRM showing on the POC.

Gr1pr

As coupon mad said, use the alternative defence, due to woeful POC, it doesn't explain anything other than mention the vehicle itself, nothing about what the driver did or didn't do, nothing to tell a judge why the PCN was issued to the keeper, or what the driver didn't do