ECP , DCB Legal court claim 2025

notrightnow

No, that was just copied from shahib_02's post.  I was going to change that to the date that it said on the letter, but wanted to make sure I was copying the right part first

notrightnow

Ok so I just amended shahib_02 post to reflect the date on my situation.  Would this be ok to send as paragraph 3?

"Referring to the POC: paragraph 1 is denied. The Defendant is not indebted to the Claimant. Paragraph 2 is denied. No PCN was "issued on 30/05/2023" (the date of the alleged visit).  Whilst the Defendant is the registered keeper, paragraphs 3 and 4 are denied. The Defendant is not liable and has seen no evidence of a breach of prominent terms.  The quantum is hugely exaggerated (no PCN can be £170 on private land) and there were no damages incurred whatsoever. The Claimant is put to strict proof of all of their allegations."

I have left the rest of the form as is.

Thanks

Coupon-mad

Coupon-mad said:

Yes, with that POC that defence para 3 will do (within the whole template defence of course but don't show us that!).

Don't you have anything to add as 3.1.?

Such as the fact that the car was only actually parked for under the free time (30 mins or whatever?) and the Claimant has instead made it appear that the car was parked longer purely due to using ANPR cameras at the far exit road. They failed to allow a fair consideration period on arrival, and 'minimum ten minute' grace period at the end. Deny that a PayByPhone session was required under the circumstances.

You should then quote the DLUHC Code 2022 'parking period' definition according to the Government.

By the way, you aren't filling in any 'form'.

Car1980

Also try having a go on the app. You might find that replicating your stay, adjusting some of the timings due to entry/parking/exit differences might bring up a £0.00 charge which you can screenshot.

notrightnow

Thank for looking

@Coupon-mad : Thank you for your suggestions. I have amended point 3.1 from what you have written so it is relevant to my case.  I have a question about quoting DLUHC Code 2022 'parking period' though  I checked google and it says that it has been withdrawn temporarily. How should I approach writing that as it doesn't seem that it is in force atm and therefore not something parking companies have to follow?  Should I say that this has been decided by the government, or how best should I refer to it?

@Car1980 - Thanks.  I'll have a try

Coupon-mad

Copy what others wrote in their defences about that definition.

Also - haven't you noticed that half the defence you're using cites the DLUHC code?!

notrightnow

I have amended section 3 to this

3.     Referring to the POC: paragraph 1 is denied. The Defendant is not indebted to the Claimant. Paragraph 2 is denied. No PCN was "issued on 30/05/2023" (the date of the alleged visit).  Whilst the Defendant is the registered keeper, paragraphs 3 and 4 are denied. The Defendant is not liable and has seen no evidence of a breach of prominent terms.  The quantum is hugely exaggerated (no PCN can be £170 on private land) and there were no damages incurred whatsoever. The Claimant is put to strict proof of all of their allegations."

 

3.1 The Claimant has ignored the Parking (Code of Practice) Act 2019 first published in February 2022, due to be finalised after a Judicial Review delay engineered by the parking industry, who did not object to the following clause which remains unchanged: 

3.2 The definition of a “parking period” specifically excludes dropping off/picking up passengers. Clause 2.24 defines a parking period as: "the length of time that a vehicle has been parked, i.e. left stationary otherwise than in the course of driving, after any relevant consideration period has expired (excluding instances where the driver has stopped to enable passengers to leave or enter the vehicle). This is not the period between a vehicle being recorded as entering and departing controlled land." 

 

3.3 The car was only parked under the 30 minute free time period allowed and the Claimant has instead made it appear that the car was parked longer purely due to using ANPR cameras at the far exit road. They have failed to allow a fair consideration period on arrival to actually find a parking space, and 'minimum ten minute' grace period at the end.  Due to this, a PayByPhone session was not required under these circumstances. 

 

3.2 The overstay was claimed to be 11 minutes according to ANPR cameras which, given the above mentioned DLUHC CODE 2022 and the correct definitions of 'parking period' and 'consideration period' according to the will of Parliament, pursuant to the test of fairness in the Consumer Rights Act 2015 would fall into this definition, giving 10 minutes grace on exit as well as time to find a space and actually park.

@Coupon-mad - I didn't really no.  I'm new to this and it's all pretty confusing for me tbh.  I've since looked at it properly and see that there is a lot of it on there, as well as other cases. I'm getting that even though its not legally implemented currently, its still looked at a good reference for countering unscrupulous actions from parking firms.

Coupon-mad

Yep that's right. The new Government is working on it but it's taking time.

Good defence now!

notrightnow

Ok thanks

Defence submitted.  Onto the next part!

Nellymoser

With your defence completed please consider supporting the parking petitions. Join the MPs groups and motorists who are pushing Govt for their CoP and PP regulation. We need Govt action no more verbal promises.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6595460/parking-petitions-x-7-on-uk-parliament-petitions-website