Summoned to court by parkingeye, please help im so confused!

sweetdaisynova

Hi there this is the first time that im posting on this tread.

Short backstory- Machines werent working at car park, tried calling them to pay, they didnt answer. Got a letter in the mail stating that i had to pay 60 pounds, i appealed to parkinggeye. Didnt hear anything until a letter 57 days later saying that i had to pay 100 pounds now, my initial claim was declined and it was already over 28 days so i couldnt appeal to POPLA.

I now recived a summons to court. I have done the MCOL and I am now writing up my defence but honestly my brain is fried, ive read the newbie thread but im still confused. Im using the template from @Coupon-mad

Which paragraphs do i have to change in the template? Is it only the last line of paragraph 1 and paragraph 3? I dont need to change 4,5,6 etc?

I have no idea what to write for paragraph 3, i cant find any examples for this exact POC:

for monies outstanding from the Defendant in relation to Parking Charge (reference xxx) issued on 11/03/2024. The signage clearly displayed throughout (name of carpark) states that this is private land, managed by ParkingEye Ltd, and that it is subject to terms and conditions, including the payment of parking tariffs, by which those who park agree to be bound (the contract). ParkingEye's ANPR system captured vehicle xxx entering and leaving the site on 06/03/2024, and parking without a valid paid parking ticket. The Defendant had the opportunity to appeal to POPLA, the independent appeals service for parking on private land, but this has not been taken.

Amount claimed- 125 (+court and legal fees) = 210 pounds

This is what ive written for 3.1:

The Defendant tried multiple methods to pay for their parking. The sole machine on site was not working and displayed the error message “no payment method available, please use another kiosk”. The Defendant then called twice to pay the parking fee but ParkingEye not pick up. The Defendant has photographic, timestamped evidence for both of these instances. The Defendant submitted an appeal with this evidence on the 14/03/2024 once they received a 60 pound fine via letter. The Defendant did not hear back from Parkingeye until the 10/05/24 via letter, stating that the Defendants initial appeal was declined and the Defendant could not appeal again. This is a breach of the Defendants right to appeal to POPLA within 28 days of their initial claim being rejected, since they were never told that their initial appeal was rejected.

Please help me I am willing to fight this claim but i am very confused. 

Gr1pr

Definitely not a summons, but definitely a live N1SDT court claim pack from the CNBC in Northampton using MCOL 

Don't worry,  you will get very good advice and feedback on here 

Did Parking Eye issue the claim   ?

Or

Was it issued by DCB Legal on behalf of Parking Eye   ?

The top 2 boxes on the left of the claim form have the information 

Ideally post a redacted picture of the POC on the lower left of the claim form after hiding the VRM details first,  Don't show the rest of the claim form 

What is the issue date from the top right of the claim form   ?

What date was the AOS completed   ?

You usually alter only paragraphs 2 & 3 and add a 3.1 too

Coupon-mad

Search the forum for defences that you find using these keywords:

parking defence £25 new tactic Summer 2023 

sweetdaisynova

Gr1pr said:

Definitely not a summons, but definitely a live N1SDT court claim pack from the CNBC in Northampton using MCOL 

Don't worry,  you will get very good advice and feedback on here 

Did Parking Eye issue the claim   ?

Or

Was it issued by DCB Legal on behalf of Parking Eye   ?

The top 2 boxes on the left of the claim form have the information 

Ideally post a redacted picture of the POC on the lower left of the claim form after hiding the VRM details first,  Don't show the rest of the claim form 

What is the issue date from the top right of the claim form   ?

What date was the AOS completed   ?

You usually alter only paragraphs 2 & 3 and add a 3.1 too

Hi there thanks so much for your response, 

Im pretty sure it was issued by parkingeye, since they are the claimant and their address is listed.

Issue date 27th of may 

I did the AOS yesterday (4/6/24)

Im not sure what to do really, just submit my defense via MCOL and follow the 12 steps ? 

Also still not too sure what to write for paragraph 3 


thanks for the help

Car1980

I think we need some contract law insight in these kind of cases.

If you left because payment would not be accepted, there is clearly no contract and no contract ever existed in order to be breached.

Now if you stayed despite best efforts to pay, the parking company would erroneously argue that it's no different from walking out of a shop with the item even if the till didn't work.

So, what are we arguing here under contract law?

That the contract never existed because consideration is an exchange of something of value? And whilst the parking space was the consideration on one side, the consideration of money was not accepted by the other party. So the contract never got to the stage for it to fully exist in order for it to be breached, so no £100 is owed. It is in effect in limbo and the other side is still owed £1 or £2. Presumably by now the contract has been voided because the other side is refusing to accept the £1 they were originally were offering and is in effect unsuccessfully attempting to vary the contract, yet still arguing for a breach.

Thoughts?

sweetdaisynova

Car1980 said:

I think we need some contract law insight in these kind of cases.

If you left because payment would not be accepted, there is clearly no contract and no contract ever existed in order to be breached.

Now if you stayed despite best efforts to pay, the parking company would erroneously argue that it's no different from walking out of a shop with the item even if the till didn't work.

So, what are we arguing here under contract law?

That the contract never existed because consideration is an exchange of something of value? And whilst the parking space was the consideration on one side, the consideration of money was not accepted by the other party. So the contract never got to the stage for it to fully exist in order for it to be breached, so no £100 is owed. It is in effect in limbo and the other side is still owed £1 or £2. Presumably by now the contract has been voided because the other side is refusing to accept the £1 they were originally were offering and is in effect unsuccessfully attempting to vary the contract, yet still arguing for a breach.

Thoughts?

I agree its a tricky situation. I did actually offer to pay the original 1 pound fee but they never responded. I tried two methods to pay as well so Its not for a lack of trying.

My case is also based on the fact that under POPLA i had 28 days to appeal the inital rejection, but parkingeye (deliberate or not) told me 57 days after that it was declined, revoking my right to appeal via POPLA.

Car1980

Yep, they're clowns. But since this is all based on contract law and this is a PE in-house claim, you'd be best having a specific contractual argument for your exact situation why the money isn't owed. There is one, but I'm not a lawyer. Someone will chip in...

Gr1pr

Do not submit the defence on MCOL,  you will be emailing the final defence pdf document to claim.responses,  as explained in the 12 steps

Use the defence template that is for Parking Eye cases   ( I would think  )

Its usually paragraph 3,1 that people are having trouble with , not paragraph 3

Post a picture of the top left of the claim form,  after hiding your name and address plus any QR code etc, so just the Parking Eye top section plus showing the box below it, above your personal details 

Coupon-mad

Did you do the search I advised? That finds you EVERY recent ParkingEye claim and defence.

sweetdaisynova

Hi @Coupon-mad

I have tried looking but I cant seem to find a  paragraph 3 template that isn't specific to another person's case (eg their paragraph mentions not being the driver, not seeing the signs etc) so wouldnt work for my defence.

I was under the impression paragraph 3 is just a response to the POC and 3.1 is more personal, but I can't find a non-specific POC response with the updated 2023 tactic.

Im new to this forum so I'm finding it a little hard to navigate, can you point me in the right direction? 

All the best 

Coupon-mad

But my search finds ParkingEye defence wording about the added £25. I just tested it and found loads.

Try copying & pasting this exact, longer wording into the search box then read at least 5 ParkingEye defence results:

In a new tactic only seen from this Claimant in Summer 2023, the sum claimed under purported 'contract' has been suddenly and disproportionately exaggerated by £25