Plymouth port car park

Gr1pr

Based on the paperwork so far,  they issued a notification on the incident date,  what is known as a Notice to Driver,  so that april postal PCN was the subsequent letter to the keeper,  not a reminder  ( you stated that it was a reminder,  which it isnt,  plus you complained about no previous postal Notice,  but there wouldn't have been one   )

They may have used ANPR,  but not according to the paperwork in april or the POC in the claim itself , there is absolutely no mention of ANPR , no pictures either

They say the location was King Point Marina , it looks a large area under redevelopment in google maps , possibly including Milbay docks,  only to be expected to be very large due to being at Plymouth . If you went into the car park next to the Dock restaurant then it appears to be the location they stated,  King Point Marina

The fact that you never saw any windscreen notice doesn't prove that it never happened,  only that you never saw one

Confusing,  isnt it 

But you must defend the actual claim,  the POC represents that claim 

Naming the driver binned any no keeper liability argument and POFA is a moot point because of it, no legs

Coupon-mad

But dead easy to win. Copy this defence but change the date of event:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6576392/defence-draft-help

... and add the bit I suggested, minus this bit: "Whilst the Defendant did not see any prominent signs when visiting the location - and to this day, still does not know from the postal 'PCN' nor from reading the woefully inadequate POC what term is supposed to have been breached - it is known that this is not a pay & display car park."

...which could be replaced with:

The Defendant only received a reminder and not any initial Notice to Keeper.  The Defendant wrote to ParkingEye requesting further details and advising them that reason for briefly stopping was due to a medical emergency. This is an exempt matter covered by the Port byelaws and under those circumstances, the Claimant has no legitimate interest in pursuing the charge.

Then it would continue as shown in the link "Further, this Claimant's standard signage does not..."

and then paragraph 4 onwards of the actual Template Defence follows in full. Renumbered.

Job done!

DO NOT SHOW US THE TEMPLATE.

 

Fruitcake

If the sign for the other PPC is still in situe, a photo of that with the question, which Ts and Cs, the contract, of a completely different and unrelated PPC are PE claiming have been breached?

Have a look at the port bylaws to see if stopping in certain circumstances is a permitted activity. Even if it isn't, it would be an unreasonable contract clause to prevent medical assistance being provided to another person.

Plan A is still the best option, a complaint to the Port Authority and your MP, stating the vehicle stopped for an occupant to attend to a medical emergency, and that the sign displayed is for a completely different unregulated private parking company to the claimant.
Local and national press and media might be interested in a motorist being penalised for someone giving medical aid to another.

Lovelyjubbly101

Gr1pr said:

Based on the paperwork so far,  they issued a notification on the incident date,  what is known as a Notice to Driver,  so that april postal PCN was the subsequent letter to the keeper,  not a reminder  ( you stated that it was a reminder,  which it isnt,  plus you complained about no previous postal Notice,  but there wouldn't have been one   )

They may have used ANPR,  but not according to the paperwork in april or the POC in the claim itself , there is absolutely no mention of ANPR , no pictures either

They say the location was King Point Marina , it looks a large area under redevelopment in google maps , possibly including Milbay docks,  only to be expected to be very large due to being at Plymouth . If you went into the car park next to the Dock restaurant then it appears to be the location they stated,  King Point Marina

The fact that you never saw any windscreen notice doesn't prove that it never happened,  only that you never saw one

Confusing,  isnt it 

But you must defend the actual claim,  the POC represents that claim 

Naming the driver binned any no keeper liability argument and POFA is a moot point because of it, no legs

I never left my vehicle. Literally stayed there until I felt safe enough to drive again..definitely no windscreen notice. Never went to the car park next to the restaurant. The pictures are online..Didn't even know there was another car park up front..just pulled into the first safe spot...and the car park used is called Millbay Docks car park..

Thank you for all the valid points  

Gr1pr

Google maps doesn't seem to show a car park of that name,  but Miller Court is nearby with businesses at the bottom,  old pictures on Google that show parking company PPS, could have changed since

It might help us if you posted suitable copies of those redacted pictures of the vehicle in situ at the time 

Lovelyjubbly101

Hi everyone, sorry I've been inundated with lots of issues. Illness, work etc all becomes very stressful.. I submitted the initial response to the claim and have now received their information stating they wish to go yo court. So I have a form to complete from County court..

KeithP

Lovelyjubbly101 said:

Hi everyone, sorry I've been inundated with lots of issues. Illness, work etc all becomes very stressful.. I submitted the initial response to the claim and have now received their information stating they wish to go yo court. So I have a form to complete from County court..

What does 'initial response to the claim' mean?
You have never told us whether you filed a Defence or not.

'I have now received their information'?? Whose information? Probably the Claimant's.

And are we now supposed to guess what 'a form to complete from the County court' is?

I am going to assume that you did file a Defence within the timescale allowed, and that you received a response from the Claimant as described in Item 7 on that checklist you were following.

Your next step is to deal with the Directions Questionnaire that the CNBC has sent you and items 8 onwards on that checklist describes how you might do that.

Coupon-mad

All of which is covered in the first 12 steps in the Template Defence thread first post.

Lovelyjubbly101

Apologies for not being clearer, yes I filed the defence in January. I have received the Directions Questionnaire. DCB Legal sent me a pre-emptive completed Questionnaire attached which I ignored. I'm not sure what purpose it serves. So I am filing my response papers and a copy to DCB Legal today.

 

Coupon-mad

No rush, wait for the CNBC to send yours to you.  MCOL will flag up when it is posted. Or have you got it?