CNBC - Disabled Parking Bay

pay2park

Hi,

Advice/Help much appreciated. I recently had a CNBC Claim Form sent through for parking in a disabled bay without displaying a BB on private land, the incident happened in 2023 and I wasnt the driver at the time. The driver was parked in a disabled bay whilst collecting a disabled passenger so didn't have the blue badge to hand at time of parking. No physical PSN was put on the vehicle at the time, parking fines and letters followed via post of which I just ignored thinking that was the correct thing to do. I have submitted an AOS via the MCOL website today, just looking for help with next steps and defense please.

Gr1pr

Post the names of the private parking company claimant involved and their lawyers if they are on the left of the claim form

Post the Issue date from the top right of the claim form below

Post a redacted picture of the POC from the lower left of the claim form below after hiding the VRM details first

pay2park

Private Parking Company: UKCPS Ltd

Lawyers: Moorside Legal Services

Issue date: 1st April 2026

POC: The Claim is for an unpaid Parking Charge issued for a breach of contractual terms on 27/11/2023 at location X to vehicle Y. The signage displayed at the site set out contractual terms and offered a contractual licence, which the Defendant accepted by parking. The Claimant has authority to operate the site and issue charges. The breach was: In a disabled bay without valid badge displayed. The Defendant is liable as the driver and/or keeper, in contract and/or pursuant to POFA Sch 4, and the charge remains unpaid despite demand. AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS 1. £170.00 being the total of the PCN. 2. Costs and Court fees. The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from 25/12/2023 to 30/03/2026 on £170.00 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £0.02.

Coupon-mad

Here's an idea for your bespoke para 3 (below) and you must also add to the end of the template para 2, that the Defendant was not the driver.

And you may need to remove para 10 of the Template to make it all fit in MCOL (para 10 can be added to the D's witness statement later on, before the hearing when you provide evidence and the driver's statement).

3. It is denied that £170.00 could be "the total of the PCN" as pleaded by the Claimant because these are capped at no more than £100. That sum also exceeds the 'maximum sum' set in the POFA 2012, the only law enabling keeper liability, and the Claimant is put to strict proof of full Schedule 4 compliance. The Defendant denies liability.

3.1. It is further denied that a breach of contractual terms occurred on 27/11/2023 involving the vehicle in question. The driver will provide a witness statement and has firstly informed the Defendant that there was inadequate (or no adjacent) signage at the accessible bays and there was no prominent offer of a contractual licence, and nothing about terms & conditions or a parking charge was seen. However, accessible bays are provided as a 'reasonable adjustment' under the Equality Act 2010 ('the EA') and as a second point, the driver has confirmed that they parked in a disabled bay whilst collecting a disabled passenger who had a Blue Badge. Use of such a bay for that purpose is allowed as a matter of consumer protection law - the EA and its statutory Code of Practice - and had the Claimant's ticketer approached the car and tried to affix a windscreen 'PCN' the passenger would have had a fair opportunity to show their Blue Badge. These cannot possibly be displayed on arrival in circumstances where a driver initially stops and assists the waiting Blue Badge holder to approach and board. In those few seconds, photos were taken - unbeknown to the driver - in a lurking and deliberately covert set up no better than when this Claimant was a notorious wheel-clamper. The 'ticketing' (weeks later, sent by post) was predatory, allowed no observation period and was plainly unfair, taking no account of circumstances. The Defendant wishes to cross-examine the Claimant's ticketer at the hearing and to see any CCTV footage in full.

Le_Kirk

With an issue date of 01/04/26 and having completed the AoS in a timely manner your defence deadline date is 4.00 p.m. on 05/05/26

pay2park

Update - I have submitted defence as per template adding para 3 & 3.1 above using MCOL today, I indeed had to remove paragraph 10 to fit it within the MCOL 122 line limit.

I dont think I need to do anymore at this stage? just sit tight?

Gr1pr

Just follow the 8 steps in the defence template thread in announcements

pay2park

Just had a letter from their solicitor asking for a copy of the blue badge?

Gr1pr

Email a redacted picture of it, leaving the last 4 characters of the badge number on show ( hide the rest, same as you would for a debit card. ) and redact the photo too, so no personal details, leave the dates and name on show

Tell them that the original will be produced in court

Coupon-mad

Yep, do the above and (when they reply after that) do not settle if they try persuading you to pay a smaller sum.

You do not owe any stranger (they didn't make themselves known or visible, so the company is a stranger to you) any money for the minutes taken to board/alight a disabled passenger.

Charging for that exempt activity (it's not a 'parking period' says the government) is not only unfair under the CRA 2015 but it also breaches the Equality Act 2010.

It is further likely to be illegal according to the ICO, due to covert surveillance with insufficient warning or full t&cs at the accessible bay and/or lack of GDPR privacy notice signage. Bet the driver had no idea they were being filmed. That breaches the DPA 2018 Principles and ICO rules about surveillance and transparency.

This will end up discontinued by Autumn.

pay2park

Will do, Thanks.