N1SDT received

ElmoYoda

Hi all, 

Long time lurker, first time poster. 

I read through the newbies post thoroughly when the NTK was received - 7/11/20. 

The PCN relates to an alleged contravention on the 10/10/20. NTK was issued on 5/11/20 and received on 7/11/20. From advice from this forum, I initially appealed to Smart Parking stating POFA 2021 (Schedule 4), where no Notice to Driver was issued at the time of the alleged incident a Notice to Keeper must be delivered to the keeper within 14 days. I submitted the appeal, heard no response and thought nothing more of it. 

This year, I started to receive letters from DCBL I assume the debt had been sold on. I did nothing until the LBC. I emailed DCBL stating the invalidity of the PCN due to POFA. I heard nothing, not even an acknowledgement. Now I have received a N1SDT Claim Form. 

I'm looking for advice around the Defence. I have gone back through the Newbies post and, ashamedly, I must admit I find it all a little confusing. Can my defence be something as simple as;

1. I am the Defendant, ElmoYoda, the registered keeper of vehicle registration, E1M0 YO4A, I deny liability for the entirety of the claim.

2.The Claimant alleges that a parking charge arose from an incident on 10/10/20.

3.The Claimant did not issue a Notice to Driver at the time of the alleged incident. Therefore, the only route to holding a registered keeper liable under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4 (“POFA”), was by delivering a compliant Notice to Keeper (NTK) within 14 days of the alleged event, pursuant to paragraph 9(4) of Schedule 4.

4.The Claimant’s NTK was received on 7/11/20 and issued on 5/11/20, which was 27 days after the alleged parking event. This is outside the strict 14-day period required by POFA.

5.As a result of this failure, the Claimant has not met the mandatory conditions set out in POFA Schedule 4. Consequently, the Claimant cannot transfer liability for the alleged charge from the unknown driver to me as the registered keeper.

6.The Defendant puts the Claimant to strict proof of compliance with all provisions of POFA 2012, including but not limited to evidence of posting, dates of delivery, and the mandatory NTK wording.

7.Absent compliance with POFA, only the driver could be held liable. The Claimant has provided no evidence of who was driving at the time, and the Defendant has no obligation to identify the driver. This contravention was 5 years ago. 

8. In the circumstances, the Claimant has no cause of action against the Defendant as keeper, and the claim must be dismissed.


----
Would that suffice?

Coupon-mad

Not just that - you need to use our template defence to ensure you gave ALL the points needed - but you can put a shorter version of that in as your paragraph 3.

However there are Smart defences already written recently that already make this point, plus the fact that the person signing under the Statement of Truth has lied about the POFA.

You don't need to draft this. Other Smart defences already went before you. Copy!

Did you realise Smart chose never to use POFA worded PCNs until this year? In other words they could never hold a keeper liable, even if their NTK arrived by day 14 because their wording only held the driver liable.

ElmoYoda

Okay - I have now got the draft defence ready. Can I just check, I only need paragraphs, 1-10? Also, here is my more succinct paragraph 3 - is it any good? 

The Claimant alleges a parking charge from 10/10/20 but did not issue a Notice to Driver. Under POFA 2012, a Notice to Keeper (NTK) must be delivered within 14 days (by 24/10/20) to transfer liability to the registered keeper. The NTK was issued on 05/11/20 and received on 07/11/20, 27 days after the event, and therefore not compliant with POFA. Furthermore, Smart Parking have only recently began using POFA-compliant Parking Charge Notices so they cannot rely on POFA to pursue keeper liability for an incident in 2020. The Claimant is put to strict proof of compliance with all POFA requirements. As liability cannot transfer to the keeper and no evidence has been provided as to the driver, the Claimant has no cause of action against the Defendant. The claim must be dismissed.

Thank you for your help - it's greatly appreciated. 

Coupon-mad

Where's the usual bit I suggested you copy from another Smart defence (search the forum for recent threads), about the signatory of this claim lying about POFA liability?

That's powerful to add. When a person signs under a statement of truth and routinely lies about the Defendant's liability (EVERY SMART CLAIM CONTAINS THIS UNTRUTH), that signatory can be held in contempt of court.

You didn't have to write any of this from scratch. You could have just copied from one

ElmoYoda

Ah I see, so I've underlined the section I found on a previous post and added to mine. I have copied lots, I've haven't wrote much from scrath - just added in my details etc...  The Claimant alleges a parking charge from 10/10/20 but did not issue a Notice to Driver. Under POFA 2012, a Notice to Keeper (NTK) must be delivered within 14 days (by 24/10/20) to transfer liability to the registered keeper. The NTK was issued on 05/11/20 and received on 07/11/20, 27 days after the event, and therefore not compliant with POFA. Furthermore, Smart Parking have only recently began using POFA-compliant Parking Charge Notices so they cannot rely on POFA to pursue keeper liability for an incident in 2020. The Claimant is put to strict proof of compliance with all POFA requirements. As liability cannot transfer to the keeper and no evidence has been provided as to the driver, the Claimant has no cause of action against the Defendant. The claim must be dismissed. Regarding paragraph 3 of the Particulars of Claim, the Claimant has never utilised the provisions of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (“POFA”) and has never been able to hold registered keepers liable under that statute. Accordingly, the Claimant’s solicitor, by signing a statement of truth which relies upon POFA in this claim, has misled the Court as to the applicable law.

Gr1pr

ElmoYoda said:

 3) The Claimant alleges a parking charge from 10/10/20 but did not issue a Notice to Driver. Under POFA 2012, a Notice to Keeper (NTK) must be delivered within 14 days (by 24/10/20) to transfer liability to the registered keeper. The NTK was issued on 05/11/20 and received on 07/11/20, 27 days after the event, and therefore not compliant with POFA. Furthermore, Smart Parking have only recently began using POFA-compliant Parking Charge Notices so they cannot rely on POFA to pursue keeper liability for an incident in 2020. The Claimant is put to strict proof of compliance with all POFA requirements. As liability cannot transfer to the keeper and no evidence has been provided as to the driver, the Claimant has no cause of action against the Defendant. The claim must be dismissed. Regarding paragraph 3 of the Particulars of Claim, the Claimant has never utilised the provisions of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (“POFA”) and has never been able to hold registered keepers liable under that statute. Accordingly, the Claimant’s solicitor, by signing a statement of truth which relies upon POFA in this claim, has misled the Court as to the applicable law.

So presumably this is your draft,  I have separated it from your feedback 

ElmoYoda

Yes it's my draft, Coupon-mad suggested I add in about the statement of truth. 
Thank you for separating it. 

Coupon-mad

ElmoYoda said:

Yes it's my draft, Coupon-mad suggested I add in about the statement of truth. 
Thank you for separating it. 

Yep, that'll do nicely. They'll discontinue after the new year, before any hearing. No worries!

And once the defence is submitted, do stick around. This month, we need you:

PLEASE bookmark this thread below and do the government's Public Consultation if you haven't done it yet. Their proposals are wrong. We must stop them.

See this thread: -

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

We need every poster to come back & complete this vital Consultation before the deadline! Just 2 weeks left but please don't rush it. You can do some then save it and come back to it as you have time.

We understand that you may need some pointers. It looks laborious, we get that.

So to try to help, I've written some guidance on that thread.

Any questions on the Consultation please ask - on the dedicated thread - but I've covered up to question 20 already in that first post, openly telling everyone what I'm going to put and/or what sort of evidence you might wish to use for your response, if you agree with what we'll be saying from our experience.

Whilst your answers must of course be your own, there are vital points to safeguard motorists interests to make, that many people may not think of without our guidance because we see cases every day and we know the legal background.

However, people like you have lived & breathed the intimidation, greed and unfairness first hand so your voice is needed!

ElmoYoda

So do you think there is anything else to add or am I good to go? 

Gr1pr

ElmoYoda said:

So do you think there is anything else to add or am I good to go? 

Good to go  ( if CM says she is happy with it, that'll do nicely,  it's definitely good to go  )

ElmoYoda

Coupon-mad & Gr1pr: Thank you both so much. Defence submitted. I will update accordingly and will be sure to fill the consultation in.