Received letter from QDR solicitors

ChrisBristol88

Hi, I have now received acknowledgement of the defence from the court. What's the likely next steps? Do Smart Parking tend to bail at this stage or inform the court that they wish to proceed? Also, they mention that Smart Parking may 'contact me direct to resolve any dispute'. Does anyone know if this happens? What should I do if it does?

Gr1pr

Study the 8 steps in the defence template thread in announcements

Ignore any interim calls or contact

Cases proceed up until a few weeks before the hearing date, when the claimant must decide if they are paying for the hearing to go ahead, or not, that is the point of no return, not the stages inbetween

Coupon-mad

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81858052#Comment_81858052

All of this is in the 8 steps you were following (re-read the Template Defence thread) but because your claim was filed by QDR, I don't expect them to discontinue.

Therefore, in readiness, go and read the entire post 2 of the NEWBIES thread.

ChrisBristol88

Hi, I have now received a letter from QDR solicitors stating their intention to proceed with the claim. They have filed their reply to my defence and something called the 'claimants directions questionnaire'. They have filed copies with the court.

I have so many questions.

1. I assume I don't need to do anything until the court contacts me?
2. They have sent copies of letters I supposedly was sent at the time (first one 9 days after the parking event) that I never received. Can they just rely on postage to claim that I ignored them? I would have paid the £60 tbh
3. They have asked for it to be heard in Warwick court; I am in Bristol
4. They have photos identifying the driver
5. They have put an aerial map of the car park with a bunch of things listed, eg where the RingGo signs are, the Ts&Cs, etc. It's impossible to know what's what, so I can't see where the failure to comply signs were etc, how big in relation to the RingGo sign. I'm not local so can't go and have a look. Is any of this stuff relevant? The Ts&Cs appear to be only displayed by the entrance, and it's unclear whether they would have been visible on driving in or only on driving out. I did not walk out of the main entrance after parking; there is a back footpath.
6. Their final statement is 'had the defendant made payment upon receipt or even engaged with the claimant at an earlier stage this could have been resolved … without additional costs'. The first I heard of this was the letter from the solicitors nearly 2 years after the event! They claim the wrote earlier letters but I received none.

ChrisBristol88

Lastly, I paid for an hour. The overstay was 27 minutes. Not sure if this is relevant, but it is the first time they have actually told me what I was supposed to have done apart from vague 'overstayed'

Also, they have agreed that particulars of claim 2 and 4 need to be struck out. These are:

2. The defendant is the registered keeper of the vehicle with the number plate (LLNNLLL) and is pursued in accordance with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

4. The Defendant is responsible for payment of charges and costs incurred in connection with the contract in accordance with Schedule 4 of the 2012 act. The defendant has not notified the claimant of any transfer of liability for the charges to a named driver of the vehicle.

Coupon-mad

All this is covered by the 8 steps already.

But we'd like to see QDR's letter.

ChrisBristol88

Hi, I submitted my response to the defence and QDR have now come back saying they wish to strike out and amend paragraphs 2 and 4 of the particulars. These are:

The PCN contravention was
INSUFFICIENT PAID TIME. The Defendant is
the registered keeper and the
driver of the Vehicle. The Defendant is in
breach of the terms and conditions and is
liable to pay £170.00 parking charge

And

The Defendant is responsible for payment of charges and costs incurred in connection
with the Contract in accordance with Schedule 4 of the 2012 Act (Charges).

So they are adding the bit in bold about me being the driver, and they are removing the section above which has been struck out.

Are these important? I have not said who was driving at the time, because I did not know and in my defence I said "The Defendant is unable to recall who may have been driving on an unremarkable date and unspecified time and no evidence has been produced." They later produced a photo which shows the driver. Before this photo was received I would have had no way of knowing whether it was me driving or the other insured person on this car, as we were both there and take turns in driving.

Gr1pr

Discussion about this in the following thread

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6659002/qdr-are-clueless

cooldude255220

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81919909#Comment_81919909

As things stand, the claim is against you as the registered keeper, using the provisions of POFA. But I suspect they have realised (without looking at your case specifically) that they are unable to use POFA to pursue you as the keeper, and/or that only the driver can be in breach of the terms and conditions, hence the need to amend the particulars.

I don't think I would be agreeing to those amendments personally…

Coupon-mad

Don't reply at all.