Advice requested please for Defence of claim (section 3)

QuietLion

Greetings fellow parking charge disputers.

I would be extremely grateful for any advice on what to include/not include from the summary below, as I would not want to undermine the defence of the claim against me.  

A brief summary is that I attended a meeting for work last year and parked in the car park next to the building I was attending.  The meeting was with one of the leaseholders of the site.  I did not receive any letters until receiving a final notice from UKPC for parking longer than permitted.  I was not aware of any signage at the time stating this limitation, nor was I warned about this from the leaseholder.  I have disputed this since out of principle (and probably communicated far more than I should have done until discovering the forum).  I have also written to the landowner but not received any response.  I am now in the claims process and currently drafting my defence (with the help of the template on the forum).  

The facts I intend to include are below (in accordance with paragraph 3 of the template) and I would welcome any helpful comments as to what I would be better off including/taking out.  Many thanks in advance:

·         The first correspondence the Defendant received from the Claimant was a letter dated X DATE titled “FINAL REMINDER” regarding a “Parking Charge”. 

·         The Defendant was subsequently, and successfully, able to submit an appeal via the Claimant’s online appeals process, and subsequently received an appeal confirmation email on X DATE.  (Appendix A). 

·         The Claimant responded to the appeal on X DATE stating: “Unfortunately the opportunity to appeal this charge has expired and the charge has been escalated for debt recovery action to commence. To make payment, information on how to do so can be found on the reverse of this notice”. (Appendix .

·         To date there has been no meaningful consideration of an appeal. 

·         The Defendant submitted a complaint to the Claimant on X DATE, which included concerns pertaining to the following facts:

o   The Defendant was afforded no previous opportunity to respond to the “Parking Charge”, as the first letter received regarding this matter was the letter of X DATE, as referred to above, as no previous letter was received.

o   The Defendant successfully submitted an appeal on the Claimant’s online appeals system, which led the Defendant to reasonably believe in good faith that he was entitled to a fair and robust appeals process.  This has been unreasonably denied. 

o   The Defendant disagreed that the terms and conditions of the car park were “clearly and prominently displayed on the signage” as alleged by the Claimant.

o   The Defendant has not received a copy of the aforementioned terms and conditions that the Claimant alleges the Defendant has breached.

o   The Defendant had permission to park on the premises by the leaseholders of Unit of the site, (NAME OF LEASEHOLDER).  The Defendant attended a meeting for work-related purposes in his capacity as (JOB DETAILS & FURTHER DCLARIFICATION OF PURPOSE FOR ATTENDING - WHICH ALSO REFERENCES UK LEGISLATION).  This is evidenced by the Defendant’s Microsoft Outlook Calendar (Appendix C).

o   The Defendant provided contact details of the meeting organiser who could verify the Defendant’s permission to park on site. 

o   The Defendant informed the Claimant that this matter is causing ongoing stress and detriment to his wellbeing.

o   The Defendant invited the Claimant to reconsider their unfair “parking charge” due to the Defendant’s legitimate reasons and permission to park in the discharge of his professional employment duties.

·         The Claimant subsequently responded to the Defendant’s complaint on X DATE.  The claimant attached copies of the previous “parking charge” notices that the Defendant did not receive.  The claimant also attached PDF copies of the alleged signage on site.  The Claimant stated that the opportunity to appeal has expired and that the case is no longer with UKPC and that the Defendant would have to contact DCBL with any queries moving forward.

·         The Defendant responded on X DATE with the following queries/concerns:

o   The Defendant has been denied a meaningful opportunity to appeal.

o   The Defendant questioned whether the one-hour limit applies to individuals working at the premises on site.

o    The Defendant requested evidence of the actual on-site signage (i.e. not electronic PDFs).

o   The Defendant asserted that the PDF attachments do not evidence the actual signage on site, especially as they are not specific to address in question, they do not include the full terms and conditions of parking, and the Defendant questioned whether the small print on these PDFs would be clearly visible on the actual on-site signage. 

o   The Defendant claimed it was reasonable for him to believe that working on site would qualify as a reasonable justification for parking.

o   The Defendant stated that no detriment was incurred to any other vehicle users as the car park was not full at the time of parking. 

o   The Defendant stated that he did not believe that the Claimant no longer had the ability to waive the unfair “parking charge”. 

o   The Defendant requested an opportunity to discuss his complaint with someone. 

·         The Claimant responded on X DATE, which included the following statement:

o   “Please be advised that employees at the site can register their vehicle at the site so not to incur a parking charge. They have to contact their employer to do this”.  The other concerns were not meaningfully responded to. 

·         The Defendant responded on X DATE with the following additional concerns:

o   The Defendant has still not received any evidence of the actual signage on site.

o   The Defendant wished to know whether any of the signage on site mentioned that employees must register their vehicle to avoid a parking charge (since this was also not evident in any of the documents provided by the Claimant). 

o   The Defendant has disputed the matter with DCBL who have informed him that they have no ability to waive the parking charge and referred the Defendant back to the Claimant. 

o   The Defendant formally requested that the parking charge is withdrawn. 

·         The Defendant has received no further meaningful response or requested evidence to date from the Claimant.

 

Thank you!

Coupon-mad

All of that and any Appendices should be saved for WS stage in a few months!

Your para 3 in defence is basically that the D was authorised to be there by xxxxxxx and that permission was the only semblance of a 'contract' agreed with anyone. The D did not receive the PCN and was denied a fair chance to appeal, which was refused by the Claimant.

QuietLion

Thank you!