County Court Claim Defence

Flyingfish23

Coupon-mad said:

You haven't been 'fined'.

Add extra paragraphs, 3.1. & 3.2. & 3.3.

3.1.  Copy the standard paragraph that starts 'Regarding the POC' as seen in all other DCB Legal threads (read literally any from Jan/Feb!) and obviously change the date to your 2 dates.

3.2.  It appears that the Defendant is being penalised for getting entrapped by the infamously hidden '5 minute rule' which has been in the national news this week. The parking industry Trade Bodies have both recognised - only after the matter was raised in both Houses of Parliament - that such a term is unfair on paying drivers and this conduct has been swiftly banned. To hold a consumer liable for an unknown '5 minute time limit' hidden term, is arguably a 'misleading omission' (ref: the CPUTRs 2008) which is an offence - unfair commercial practice - by this Claimant.

3.3. As well as being an offence, under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 a charge arising under a hidden term that places an unfair burden on the consumer is unrecoverable, so the Claimant cannot be heard to say "well it wasn't unfair last year".  That would be absurd, especially given that this same Claimant is the notorious ex-wheel-clamper responsible for the cases highlighted by BBC News (including well-publicised claims against Rosey Hudson - a £1900 claim - and Hannah Robinson - a £11,000 claim) all of which occurred around the same months and under the same "you paid too late" desperately rogue practice approach as in the extant case. Excel Parking has confirmed to irate MPs that all cases have been dropped in recent weeks due to the adverse publicity.  One wonders why they think they can pursue this one.

Initially I didn't realise what the POC was and asked to show you earlier in the thread, so here it is if it's of any use. 

Particulars of claim: 

1. The Defendant (D) is indebted to the Claimant (C) for a Parking Charge(s) issued to vehicle *** at ****

2. The PCN(s) were issued on 20/02/2024, 26/02/2024.

3. The defendant is pursued as the river of the vehicle for breach of the terms on the signs (the contract). Reason:101) Failure TO Purchase the Parking Tariff For The Registration Mark of the vehicle on site and/or within the time allowed 

4. In the alternative the defendant is pursued as the keeper pursuant to POFA 2012, Schedule 4

AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS

1. £340 being the total of the PCN(s) and damages

2. Interest at a rate of 8% per annum pursuant to s.69 of the County courts act 1984 from the date hereof at a daily rate of £.06 until judgement or sooner payment.

3. Costs and court fees

And here are my added paragraphs:

3.1. 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 20/02/2024 and 26/02/2024".  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.

3.2. It appears that the Defendant is being penalised for getting entrapped by the infamously hidden '5 minute rule' which has been in the national news this week. The parking industry Trade Bodies have both recognised - only after the matter was raised in both Houses of Parliament - that such a term is unfair on paying drivers and this conduct has been swiftly banned. To hold a consumer liable for an unknown '5 minute time limit' hidden term, is arguably a 'misleading omission' (ref: the CPUTRs 2008) which is an offence - unfair commercial practice - by this Claimant.

3.3. As well as being an offence, under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 a charge arising under a hidden term that places an unfair burden on the consumer is unrecoverable, so the Claimant cannot be heard to say "well it wasn't unfair last year".  That would be absurd, especially given that this same Claimant is the notorious ex-wheel-clamper responsible for the cases highlighted by BBC News (including well-publicised claims against Rosey Hudson - a £1900 claim - and Hannah Robinson - a £11,000 claim) all of which occurred around the same months and under the same "you paid too late" desperately rogue practice approach as in the extant case. Excel Parking has confirmed to irate MPs that all cases have been dropped in recent weeks due to the adverse publicity.  One wonders why they think they can pursue this one.

Coupon-mad

Yep. All done! They have no chance.

Flyingfish23

I have sent the defence to the email listed in the newbies thread 'ClaimResponses.CNBC@justice.gov.uk'

Flyingfish23

Hi, what do I do about the telephone mediation appointment and how do I know if it is mandatory? I got an email a while ago and apparently it's booked for the 22nd

Gr1pr

Flyingfish23 said:

Hi, what do I do about the telephone mediation appointment and how do I know if it is mandatory? I got an email a while ago and apparently it's booked for the 22nd

Mediation was made a compulsory part of the process early last summer,  2024, so if your claim issue date is since then, then Mediation is compulsory,  either way it's a 5 minute phone call,  where they try to get both sides to compromise on a monetary figure , so offer  £ zero , or possibly £10 if you wish 

As your claim issue date is January 2025, the mediation stage is definitely compulsory,  you don't get a choice

Coupon mad put Mediation advice in the newbies sticky thread in announcements near the top of the forum,  which you don't appear to have read, plus its mentioned in the 12 steps,  so study both of them carefully,  plus read other recent reports from victims who gave feedback on the mediation stage,  after completing it 

Coupon-mad

Flyingfish23 said:

Hi, what do I do about the telephone mediation appointment and how do I know if it is mandatory? I got an email a while ago and apparently it's booked for the 22nd

This is covered in the Template Defence thread.

Flyingfish23

Hi, 

I went through mediation and as expected did not come to an agreement, was sent a letter with a court date for mid August but since have received an email of discontinuation from DCB legal and Excel Parking. Thanks for all the advice on the threads etc. Finally won!

Gr1pr

Flyingfish23 said:

Hi, 

I went through mediation and as expected did not come to an agreement, was sent a letter with a court date for mid August but since have received an email of discontinuation from DCB legal and Excel Parking. Thanks for all the advice on the threads etc. Finally won!

Well done , the 5 minute rule ban wins again,  well done to Hannah and Lola  !

Please post a redacted picture of the N279 document so your success can be added to the discontinuations thread by @Umkomaas

Thank you 

Coupon-mad

Flyingfish23 said:

Hi, 

I went through mediation and as expected did not come to an agreement, was sent a letter with a court date for mid August but since have received an email of discontinuation from DCB legal and Excel Parking. Thanks for all the advice on the threads etc. Finally won!

Yay, you won!

ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST!

I'm sure you want to stand up and be counted so please show us the attached NoD.