Free parking ticket

trosinki

Hello all,

standard DCB Legal POC. Already completed AOS on MCOL.

My defence using standard template with the specifics (I may have to cut some bits to make it fit in MCOL):

The Defendant denies liability for the entirety of the claim, which relates to a parking event at XXXX, on XXth XXXX 2024. The Defendant parked within the permitted one-hour free parking period advertised.

The Defendant possesses robust evidence confirming timings from two independent and credible sources: a. Car GPS and timing logs. b. Mobile Phone GPS and timing logs. Both corroborating entry and exit times from the location.

Referring to the POC: Paragraph 1 is denied. The Defendant is not indebted to the Claimant. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant does not accept that a contravention occurred on XX/XX/2024, as alleged. Whilst the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver, 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 signage at the site provided by the Claimant was inadequate.

The Defendant explicitly requested photographic evidence from the rear windscreen in the appeal submitted on XXth XXXX 2024, demonstrating whether a ticket was displayed. Instead of providing the requested evidence, the Claimant’s subsequent letter dated XXth XXXX 2024 ignored this request and inappropriately placed the evidential burden back on the Defendant by requesting a copy of the ticket. This refusal to supply essential photographic evidence undermines the validity of the Claimant's allegations and represents a fundamental flaw in their claim.

A further appeal was sent on XXth XXXX 2024, promising a response letter within 28 days, which didn’t happen. The Defendant raised this issue formally with the Claimant complaints department. The Claimant refused to provide proof of postage or receipt, responding on XXth XXXX 2024, that they didn't have control over any postal service. This prevented the Defendant having access to the independent appeals service POPLA within the prescribed timeframe.

Thoughts?

Gr1pr

What does the POC specifically state that the breach was   ?  Word for Word

Do you have a picture of the signage   ?

trosinki

signage: https://us-noi.v-cdn.net/6031891/uploads/editor/py/grfhnwixp9nt.jpeg

POC is like: https://us-noi.v-cdn.net/6031891/uploads/editor/p8/ms5emsw8l1tf.jpg

The only difference are location, dates and the wording in Claim 3 is "Reason: Parked Without Clearly Displaying A Valid Pay And Display Ticket.."

Coupon-mad

trosinki said:

Hello all,

standard DCB Legal POC. Already completed AOS on MCOL.

My defence using standard template with the specifics (I may have to cut some bits to make it fit in MCOL):

The Defendant denies liability for the entirety of the claim, which relates to a parking event at XXXX, on XXth XXXX 2024. The Defendant parked within the permitted one-hour free parking period advertised.

The Defendant possesses robust evidence confirming timings from two independent and credible sources: a. Car GPS and timing logs. b. Mobile Phone GPS and timing logs. Both corroborating entry and exit times from the location.

Referring to the POC: Paragraph 1 is denied. The Defendant is not indebted to the Claimant. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant does not accept that a contravention occurred on XX/XX/2024, as alleged. Whilst the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver, 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 signage at the site provided by the Claimant was inadequate.

The Defendant explicitly requested photographic evidence from the rear windscreen in the appeal submitted on XXth XXXX 2024, demonstrating whether a ticket was displayed. Instead of providing the requested evidence, the Claimant’s subsequent letter dated XXth XXXX 2024 ignored this request and inappropriately placed the evidential burden back on the Defendant by requesting a copy of the ticket. This refusal to supply essential photographic evidence undermines the validity of the Claimant's allegations and represents a fundamental flaw in their claim.

A further appeal was sent on XXth XXXX 2024, promising a response letter within 28 days, which didn’t happen. The Defendant raised this issue formally with the Claimant complaints department. The Claimant refused to provide proof of postage or receipt, responding on XXth XXXX 2024, that they didn't have control over any postal service. This prevented the Defendant having access to the independent appeals service POPLA within the prescribed timeframe.

Thoughts?

Looks good. UKPC then. As the sign shows the PCN is £70, is the core claim for £140 (before court fees)?

It'll be discontinued by Christmas!

You can remove the final para of the template defence if you need to lose lines to fit MCOL.

And - straight after defending - don't forget this: if you want to be part of the push to change things in future, it's very important that people like you tell the Government NOW that:

a) you have no faith in POPLA or the IAS and that there must be the SINGLE APPEALS SERVICE that the Parking (Code of Practice) Act 2019 *almost* promised. As long as it is impartial and fully independent (and only ONE appeals service, not two involved in a race to the bottom) that will give a real option to resolve disputed cases out of court.

b).  THAT THE ENRICHMENT OF 'DEBT RECOVERY FEES' MUST BE COMPLETELY BANNED. DISPUTED CASES ARE NOT SOLVED BY A THUG THIRD PARTY DEMANDING MORE MONEY AND ENGINEERING A 'PAYMENT PLAN'.

c). Tell them about your experience and this claim, whatever makes sense for the questions you opt to answer.

Responses are invited to the Consultation now:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6617396/parking-code-of-practice-consultation-8-weeks-from-11th-july-2025/p1

Do it this month or in August at the latest pleeease! We will discuss it on that thread.

trosinki

Coupon-mad said:

Looks good. UKPC then. As the sign shows the PCN is £70, is the core claim for £140 (before court fees)?

Yes, that's correct.

Thanks for the advise.

I will also respond to the consultation.