Court claim in wife’s name for parking while I was the driver

Zm_lincs

Thanks @Coupon-mad. Yes have copy of that email. 

She couldn’t transfer it to me earlier as they didn’t send a PCN but a reminder letter with no option for appeal. We thought my email to clarifying this will stop their baseless claims as I had successfully got 7 PCNs of similar nature after appeal. Some of them were through similar email correspondence since the appeal page on their website never works and I guess it’s done on purpose. Couple of times they rejected my appeals and they withdrew the PCNs after I appealed to POPLA. I hope this court claim will have the same fate as you mentioned.

Another reason for not transferring liability was because couple of similar threats by other parking companies in the past for overstaying 6 min or 8 min etc have stopped after ignoring. So thought this will also stop like that. Tbh, it has become a part time job keeping up with all these letters as I’ve noticed that these parking companies have become more desperate recently.

DCB website also has the same issue- you submit your defence/appeal, then no confirmation apart from showing a thank you page next, which I’ve a screenshot.

Will keep you posted after AOS as I may require some advice on the draft defence in sections around my circumstances (I think section 2 and 3)?

Thanks very much for all what you do. I still can’t believe these scams are still legal and not regulated properly!

Gr1pr

The RK can name the driver at ANY POINT up until the court claim is issued, even with no NTK etc , at the reminder stage or anytime after , but 

Too late now that the claim is issued on this one, but bear it in mind for the future and any others 

Those other ignored ones are not over until the 6 years deadline has passed for a court claim , never say never 

Not YOUR circumstances, the defendant's circumstances, this is not about you

Her 2 is keeper but not the driver, simples 

Zm_lincs

Thanks @Gr1pr. Agreed, I should get used to mentioning defendant..

Zm_lincs

Hi @Gr1pr, @Coupon-mad, @KeithP - hope you're well.

AOS submitted on Sunday. Here's the draft defence, where minor changes were made to the template. Everything else is exactly as in the template. I'd really appreciate your feedback/ suggestions on this:

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.

3. The vehicle was parked at the said car park which is close to the train station while the driver was commuting to work by train. 

3.1 It is denied that the Defendent or the driver is indebted to the Claimant as the driver has paid a parking fee for the duration alleged in the POC. 

3.2 The claimant did not send a letter or PCN on 02/11/2023 as stated in the POC, therefore denying the chance to appeal with evidence of payment. Instead a reminder letter was sent to the Defendent without an option to appeal. The driver has sent proof of payment to the Claimant and later to their representative but these communications were ignored. 

3.3 The Claimant has been exhibiting predatory behaviour in several occasions before and after the alleged incident in this claim but all of those PCNs were successfully appealed by the driver either through the Claimant’s own appeal process or through POPLA since the claims made by the Claimant were unfair and factually inaccurate. 

3.4 It is denied that the defendant was the driver.

Gr1pr

3.4 isnt needed if the defendant was not the driver 

2 should say Registered Keeper but definitely not the driver, if true 

Zm_lincs

Thanks Gr1pr. Will make these changes. 

It’s true that the defendant was not the driver.

Their argument is that I paid late, however, it covers for the 12 hours I parked there. So would like to add this section as 3.4:

3.4 The driver used the car park from 8am to 7pm and made a payment for 12 hours at 5:22pm. The car park do not have a payment machine and car park users are instructed to make payment through an app provided by the Claimant. The app has technical limitations to choose the correct start time in the past as it does not allow users to mark the correct entry time.

Any suggestions?

Gr1pr

If full payment was made, say so , adding that the driver complied with the requirements so the matter is trivial and should be considered as de minimis

Leave nothing to chance 

Zm_lincs

Hello @Gr1pr, @KeithP, @Coupon-mad - thanks for your prompt guidance on this claim.

I'm pleased to inform that both ParkMaven and DCBL have emailed today confirming that they have cancelled the PCN considering that I made the payment. DCBL also informed this: "We can confirm as per our Client's instruction our file is now closed and no further action will be taken."

Am I going to get a letter from the court confirming this? Should I do anything further?

Coupon-mad

Zm_lincs said:

Thanks Gr1pr. Will make these changes. 

It’s true that the defendant was not the driver.

Their argument is that I paid late, however, it covers for the 12 hours I parked there. 

Eh?  Which is true? No lies in a defence.

Zm_lincs

Coupon-mad said:

Eh?  Which is true? No lies in a defence.

Yes this is true and as mentioned in my previous comment, they just acknowledged this and sent me this today:

Site: Westgate Car Park Peterborough

Issue date: 22/11/2023

24/07/2024

Thank you for your appeal against the above Parking Charge Notice. We have carefully considered your appeal and on this occasion, the appeal has been accepted and the charge has been cancelled.

Your booking doesn't cover your parking session which is why a PCN was issued against your vehicle. Your booking on 02.11.2023 started at 05:22 pm but you parked at around 12 noon which is before your authorised parking session.

We will waive this PCN for now as a gesture of goodwill, given that you're a consistent YourParkingSpace user, but for future reference, you need to ensure that your booking covers the whole duration of your stay as an admin fee will be charged next time.

Yours sincerely,

Appeals Department ParkMaven Ltd

So you’re saying that I should still proceed with the defence?