Claim Form / Gladstones / Park Direct / 16-04-2025

privateunadopted

Claim Form with Issue Date 16 Apr 2025 received.

Parking was alleged to have occurred on a public access street (Street A) that leads to my residential street. My street has nothing to do with the below mentioned housing development and there are no parking restrictions on my street.

Street A has marked bays on one side which belong to the houses (part of housing development) they are in front of. These marked bays have signage.
On the opposite side of Street A is a regular kerb alongside which many cars regularly park. There is also an entrance to a separate (larger) section of the housing development (within which there are further marked bays although not visible from Street A). On this opposite side there is no signage.

Park Direct claims my vehicle was parked alongside this kerb (where there is no signage). Signage clearly belongs to the marked bays only. This is a through road with public access.

I believe they have no right to enforce any parking restrictions on this road besides the marked bays.

AOS not yet submitted. Is trimmed down defence really necessary? Don't want to waste more time than necessary trimming/working on this. These cowboys should be banned.

Any help tailoring the defence would be much appreciated. Thank you.

Gr1pr

Login to MCOL and complete the AOS online first,  nothing else in there

privateunadopted

Attached is a sketch of the road layout in question in case that helps understand the context:

Coupon-mad

After doing the AOS first to buy more time, just use the Gladstones defence linked in the FIRST post of the Template Defence thread.

Easy innit? Your facts go in para 6. Job done.

privateunadopted

Coupon-mad said:

After doing the AOS first to buy more time, just use the Gladstones defence linked in the FIRST post of the Template Defence thread.

Easy innit? Your facts go in para 6. Job done.

Gotcha - AOS submitted. Checking the Gladstone defence now👍

Edit: if I have photos of the (lack of) signage, at what stage will those be provided for my defence?

Coupon-mad

WS stage, as explained in the second post of the NEWBIES thread under the red capitals heading 'IMPORTANT: KNOW WHAT HAPPENS WHEN'.

privateunadopted

Coupon-mad said:

WS stage, as explained in the second post of the NEWBIES thread under the red capitals heading 'IMPORTANT: KNOW WHAT HAPPENS WHEN'.

Thanks.

Curious to know why bother including "However, the vehicle is recognised and it is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver."?

Why automatically include the admission of being the driver in this case?

Gr1pr

Read what Bargepole explained a few years ago 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6301728/driver-not-driver-undue-reliance-on-pofa-in-court-defences

Coupon-mad

privateunadopted said:

Coupon-mad said:

WS stage, as explained in the second post of the NEWBIES thread under the red capitals heading 'IMPORTANT: KNOW WHAT HAPPENS WHEN'.

Thanks.

Curious to know why bother including "However, the vehicle is recognised and it is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver."?

Why automatically include the admission of being the driver in this case?

The only reasons not to admit to driving are:

- if you don't know for sure, or

- if the NTK wording was non-POFA.

privateunadopted

Thanks for that. 

Regarding my written defence, how does this look for a paragraph 6:

---

[REDACTED] (the ‘Road’) has marked bays on one side which belong to the houses (part of housing development) they are in front of. These marked bays have signage.
On the opposite side of the Road is a regular kerb alongside which many cars regularly park. On this opposite side there is no signage at all. The signage in question clearly belongs to the marked bays only and not for parking along the unmarked kerb. There is no indication that the signage should apply to anything but the marked bays. The Vehicle was parked alongside the kerb where there is no signage.

Coupon-mad

Yes that's good.