Parking Control Management UK Limited - Moorside Legal - CNBC Claim form

StrollinthruLife

Good morning all

New member here, first post! Thanks for having me

I have received a PCN/CNBC claim form and attempting to fight it

I have spent a lot of time reading the newbies thread and a lot of other threads linked within there, sure is a lot of reading!

I was hoping to get some advice and opinions from you all

I received a PCN at a family members residence back in March '22 in a private residents car park for which I hold a permit. Have had this permit since the day they moved in. Around the time of the alleged offence PCM had changed the permit numbering system and issued new permits, I hadn't affixed it to the window and it fell. Their photo evidence shows the letter in the footwell of my vehicle. I submitted an appeal hoping that they would have some empathy considering I could prove I have a permit, no chance, appeal rejected.

Ignored their numerous demands and have now received a claim form from the civil national business centre. I have completed the 'acknowledgement of service' online and have been putting together my defence using all the guidance and information on here. If I was to share any help would be appreciated

Gr1pr

Share a redacted picture of the POC on the bottom left of the claim form, hiding the VRM details, plus share the issue date on the claim form plus the date the AOS online was done, your MCOL claim history will tell you this 

Then share your proposed paragraphs 2 & 3 from the defence template thread, suitably adapted first ( but don't post the rest of the template. )

StrollinthruLife

Thanks Gr1pr. I have added the info



The claim issue date was 22/10/24 and the AOS was submitted and acknowledged by CNBC on 11/11/24

Paragraph 2&3 -

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 authorised operator.

3. On **/**/**, The defendant parked in [location] in vehicle [VRM} where they have consistently held a valid parking permit and is a permitted visitor since their sister, [name], began residing at [location]. Prior to the PCN issue date the defendant had recently received a renewed permit, which unfortunately fell from its visible position on the dashboard, the renewed permit was issued because the parking company had made a change to their permit system. Although the parking attendant took a photo of the fallen permit inside the vehicle footwell, this evidence has been used to uphold the charge, even though it clearly shows the defendant possessed a valid permit. The defendant has already appealed this charge with the parking company, providing an explanation and proof of permit. Unfortunately, the appeal was unsuccessful. Given these circumstances, the defendant is now requesting Parking Control Management UK Limited to reconsider and cancel this charge, as the defendant believes it is unfair and does not reflect the accidental nature of the permit’s visibility issue. 

Not sure how this is, paragraph 2 is a copy/paste of the template. Do I need to amend?

Le_Kirk

Paragraph 2 is used to accept you were registered keeper and driver OR registered keeper and NOT driver. Paragraph 3 is pretty much what you have written but you seem to be answering claims that aren't there. Just use @hharry100 defence for sparse particulars and don't do the claimant's job for them.

Gr1pr

P2 doesn't say operator, it ends with the word keeper, you add a bit onto the end, such as keeper and driver, or, keeper but not the driver, etc ( not operator. )

P3 should follow the advice given above 

Next Monday by 4pm seems to be your deadline for emailing the final defence pdf

StrollinthruLife

Le_Kirk said:

Paragraph 2 is used to accept you were registered keeper and driver OR registered keeper and NOT driver. Paragraph 3 is pretty much what you have written but you seem to be answering claims that aren't there. Just use @hharry100 defence for sparse particulars and don't do the claimant's job for them.

Thank you. I’ll amend using hharry defence

StrollinthruLife

Gr1pr said:

P2 doesn't say operator, it ends with the word keeper, you add a bit onto the end, such as keeper and driver, or, keeper but not the driver, etc ( not operator. )

P3 should follow the advice given above 

Next Monday by 4pm seems to be your deadline for emailing the final defence pdf

I was the driver but not the registered keeper, it was a company vehicle. Not sure if that changes anything?

StrollinthruLife

I'm really having trouble with the not answering claims that don't exist part. Do I need to mention that the permit had fallen or any of the other info? Or do I just state I parked there to visit my family members residence and I do hold a permit and have done since she moved in?

Gr1pr

StrollinthruLife said:

Gr1pr said:

P2 doesn't say operator, it ends with the word keeper, you add a bit onto the end, such as keeper and driver, or, keeper but not the driver, etc ( not operator. )

P3 should follow the advice given above 

Next Monday by 4pm seems to be your deadline for emailing the final defence pdf

I was the driver but not the registered keeper, it was a company vehicle. Not sure if that changes anything?

Then say so in p2

Coupon-mad

StrollinthruLife said:

I'm really having trouble with the not answering claims that don't exist part. Do I need to mention that the permit had fallen or any of the other info? Or do I just state I parked there to visit my family members residence and I do hold a permit and have done since she moved in?

Why not read a few recent ones that use the Chan and Akande transcripts, as you must?

One this weekend was worked on by @FluffySocks25  << which is a link

StrollinthruLife

Thanks so much all, work took over for a few days, twelve hour shifts take over your life, self inflicted pressure is on now!

I have amended P2 to say driver but not the registered keeper. Also amended P3 to only address the claim, which makes it very short

Also had a read of the fluffysocks and hharry threads and there's a lot of relevance

One thing I noticed is that in the POC they state the name of the housing development, not the specific road. In this development there are various different parking restrictions. So going by the POC I don't actually know what rule I broke and where I broke it. Does this make the Akande case relevant? 

I also now know why I didn't go for a career in law!