Parked outside marked Bay - UKPC Claim Form (at WS stage)

future-sailor

In March I received a PCN from UKPC Ltd which I choose to ignore.



I am the registered keeper of the vehicle but on the day it was my husband who was driving. He parked the car in such way because he felt that the building works on the left hand side of the vehicle made the parking space next to us unusable.

Here as some close up photos of the alleged offence:


I received a claim form (dated 22nd August) with the below details:

 
I responded with an AOS (on 7th September). Now I need to draft a defence but struggling to come up with something for part 2 and 3. 

If anyone has any suggestions please share this we me as I am at a loss at how to defend this.

Thanks!!

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 but not the driver.

3. Visiting Five Guys restaurant to purchase a meal (spent £58.10).

KeithP

future-sailor said:

Last month (22nd August) I received a claim form...

I responded with an AOS.

What is the Issue Date on your Claim Form?

Upon what date did you file an Acknowledgment of Service?
Your MCOL Claim History will have the definitive answer to that.

future-sailor

KeithP said:

future-sailor said:

Last month (22nd August) I received a claim form...

I responded with an AOS.

What is the Issue Date on your Claim Form?

Upon what date did you file an Acknowledgment of Service?
Your MCOL Claim History will have the definitive answer to that.

Issue date of the claim form: 22nd August 2024

Date of AOS: 7th September 2024

future-sailor

This is what I have so far - I would appreciate your feedback.

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 but not the driver.

3. The defendant was visiting Five Guys restaurant and purchased a meal (spent £58.10). The vehicle was parked leaving enough space between cars to allow for full opening of the door to enable safe manoeuvrability. The defendant did not intend to park outside marked lines and caused no obstruction or danger to other car park users. Photographs shows construction work taking place on the left-hand side of the car which would have made the nearby parking space unusable for other drivers.

4. The claim states that the vehicle was parked “NOT PARKED CORRECTLY WITHIN THE MARKINGS OF THE BAY OR SPACE”.

In Parking Eye v Beavis 4th November 2015 UKSC 2015/0116, in paragraph 310 Lord Toulson states “There may be reasons why a user parks with his wheels outside the marked bay (for example because of the way the adjacent vehicle is parked or because he is a wheelchair user and none of the blue bays are available). Examples could be multiplied. The point is that the penalty clause makes no allowance for circumstances, allows no period of grace and provides no room for adjustment”.

1505grandad

"However, the vehicle is recognised and it is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper but not the driver."

However that is contradicted by:-

"The defendant did not intend to park outside marked lines and caused no obstruction or danger to other car park users"

patient_dream

The one BIG point I would make is that the parking space is simply not big enough for modern cars

If you look at how far you are over the line, then measure that as if you were in the the lines, nor you or the car could open the doors

UKPC managed car parks are mostly like this and not suitable but a money trap by UKPC

Plus UKPC SIGNS ARE WELL KNOWN FOR THEIR TINY PRINT

As this is DCBL claim, the word damages is their silly trade mark adding a fake £70, do UKPC own the car park, doubtful, if not why are they claiming damages ?   It's actually DCBL who are making this false claim and the person who signed the claim form is NOT telling the truth to the court

LDast

Just answer the PoC as though you had never had any previous correspondence and know nothing about the PCN. Keep it very simple. Do not Mae the silly faux pas as pointed out by @1505grandad.

This will all be over when DCB Legal discontinue in a few months, just before any hearing date if you follow all the advice as noted in the Newbies?FAQ thread and the Template Defence thread.

Coupon-mad

Looks fine once you remove the error pointed out by @1505grandad

The claim will end up discontinued in 2025 so you'll never have a hearing.

  

KeithP

future-sailor said:

KeithP said:

future-sailor said:

Last month (22nd August) I received a claim form...

I responded with an AOS.

What is the Issue Date on your Claim Form?

Upon what date did you file an Acknowledgment of Service?
Your MCOL Claim History will have the definitive answer to that.

Issue date of the claim form: 22nd August 2024

Date of AOS: 7th September 2024

With a Claim Issue Date of 22nd August, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Tuesday 24th September 2024 to file a Defence.

That's 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'.

future-sailor

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 defendant was visiting Five Guys restaurant with family and purchased a meal (spent £58.10). The vehicle was parked leaving enough space between cars to allow for full opening of the door to enable safe manoeuvrability. The driver did not intend to park outside marked lines and caused no obstruction or danger to other car park users. Photographs shows construction work taking place on the left-hand side of the car which would have made the nearby parking space unusable for other drivers.

4. The claim states that the vehicle was parked “NOT PARKED CORRECTLY WITHIN THE MARKINGS OF THE BAY OR SPACE”.

In Parking Eye v Beavis 4th November 2015 UKSC 2015/0116, in paragraph 310 Lord Toulson states “There may be reasons why a user parks with his wheels outside the marked bay (for example because of the way the adjacent vehicle is parked or because he is a wheelchair user and none of the blue bays are available). Examples could be multiplied. The point is that the penalty clause makes no allowance for circumstances, allows no period of grace and provides no room for adjustment”.

Coupon-mad

Yep that inserted into the template defence will do nicely.