Smart parking

Roobyrooster

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81998768#Comment_81998768

well one is addressed to the driver and one is addressed to our limited company, both coming to the office address

Gr1pr

Are YOU defending the company defendant 2 pcn claim ?

Or

Are you defending the named driver 3 pcn claim ?

Roobyrooster

both, i'm the named driver and the company owner.

Coupon-mad

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81998770#Comment_81998770

Oh OK. So they had to be separate claims then, and the Defendants can't use Henderson v Henderson.

• The company can use the full defence by @Meltof which is towards the end of the Smart Parking Claim Defence Group Thread (don't sign it in your name. Do this as the company if that is the entity named as Defendant);

• The driver uses the Template Defence (see top of forum) admitting to driving in para 2 and
• denying liability in para 3, also saying that the POC fails to even specify three stated incident dates/times. No facts are averred that tell the Court or the Defendant why the Claimant is pursuing the Defendant for payment of three charges or how long the three alleged overstays were, and exactly when (dates & times) these three incidents occurred. It is impossible for the Defendant to respond to such a woefully deficient claim except to suggest a lack of fair 'consideration period' to allow time for payment on arrival and accordingly, to deny liability and put the Claimant to strict proof of all allegations. The deficient boilerplate POC are liable to be struck out under:
  a. CPR 3.4.(2) (a) because they disclose no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim for three PCs;
  b. CPR 3.4.(2) (b) because they constitute an abuse of the court’s process; and
  c. CPR 3.4.(2) (c) because they breach CPR 16.4(1)(a).

Roobyrooster

do we save the appeal letter for a later date. No need to mention the fact that when we appealed they admitted i paid for more time than i actually spent in the car park?

Gr1pr

Save your ammunition for later in the process, the WS stage in several months time

Stick to the 2 strategies outlined by coupon mad above

Coupon-mad

This isn't appeal stage. These must be defended and I explained exactly how.

But this is interesting:

"when we appealed they admitted I paid for more time than i actually spent in the car park"

Show us that reply. A picture, ideally.

Did they try to say you took too long to pay but paid in full? This is important to establish because pursuing PCNs for that (known as the '5 minute rule') is completely banned.

Roobyrooster

it's in the first letter i posted

Coupon-mad

Really wish you'd come here in 2023 before appealing these, eeek!

All of them were 100% winnable at POPLA by the registered keeper company. It would have been impossible to lose the appeals as long as the keeper appealed, citing no keeper liability.

Too late now but you are right, that reply makes no sense at all. Probably a typo. Maybe they meant 307 minutes but unless you can remember, who knows!

However, I advised how these two claims should be defended. Advice hasn't changed.

🙂

Roobyrooster

I shall take your advice. Thanks.