PARKING EYE CLAIM DEFENCE

P4R5IVAL

Hello, hoping to get a little help with my constructed defence and to get a few questions answered. I got a claim form Parking Eye at the beginning of May, below is the claim form, just wondering if i still have to email the defence or if nowadays it should be posted in the MCOL defence box, ive done this once before and i think i was told to email and the defence was constructed a bit differently. If my calculations are correct from what i read in other threads i have until today (8/6/26) at 4pm to file my defence due to the deadline falling on a weekend is this correct?

Below is also my reconstructed paragraph 3 based on my overstaying in a carpark by accident as i thought it was 3 hours maximum instead of 1 hour 30.

3. It is admitted that the Defendant was the driver of the vehicle on the material date. However, the Defendant denies that a parking contract was formed because the signage was insufficiently prominent and failed to adequately draw the driver's attention to any maximum stay period or parking charge. Accordingly, it is denied that the terms relied upon by the Claimant were fairly incorporated into any contract. The Claimant is put to strict proof by way of contemporaneous photographs of the signage and a site plan showing its location.

Please let me know if this is a suitable defence, much appreciated.

Coupon-mad

Yes you do the defence on MCOL and follow the 8 steps and today is the deadline.

It says in the POC that this occurred in two days in January, so if that's true than your 3 hour stay was in darkness on arrival, possibly bad weather conditions too. Therefore add these three things to your para 3:

• the fact it was dark / raining and lighting was non existent within the bay areas;
• the fact that it used to be 3 hours free stay and you believe the Claimant failed to add the (mandatory under the sector Code of Practice) 'terms have changed' extra signs at the entrance and to advertise this prominently within the site, especially needed in hours of darkness;
• the fact that the parking charge cannot have been £130 and this has been inflated to make more money and never gets past a Judge. No ParkingEye sign sets a PCN at £130, which is well above the sum allowed under the Code of Practice and above the maximum sum in Schedule 4 of POFA.
  

P4R5IVAL

Thank you, here is my revised version.

3. It is admitted that the Defendant was the driver of the vehicle on the material date. However, the Defendant denies that a parking contract was formed because the signage was insufficiently prominent and failed to adequately draw the driver’s attention to any maximum stay period or parking charge. The alleged parking event occurred during the hours of darkness and the Defendant’s position is that the signage was inadequately illuminated, with little or no lighting within the parking bay areas. Accordingly, it is denied that the terms relied upon by the Claimant were fairly incorporated into any contract.
The Defendant further notes that the Particulars of Claim seek a sum that appears to exceed the parking charge stated on any signage. The Claimant is put to strict proof of the amount displayed on the signs in place at the material time. It is denied that any parking charge of £130 was prominently displayed or recoverable, and the Defendant avers that any attempt to recover sums exceeding those permitted by statute, including Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, is unlawful and unrecoverable.
The Claimant is put to strict proof by way of contemporaneous photographs of the signage and a site plan showing its location.

I’ve left out the 3 hours as I’m not 100% sure it used to be just what I thought.

Coupon-mad

You don't need this because it's already in the template defence:

"the Defendant avers that any attempt to recover sums exceeding those permitted by statute, including Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, is unlawful and unrecoverable."

Replace with my words which I wrote carefully with the Template in mind. Don't get ChatGPT to re-write defences:

• No ParkingEye sign sets a PCN at £130, which is well above the sum allowed under the Code of Practice and above the maximum sum in Schedule 4 of POFA.


Le_Kirk

With an issue date of 05/05/26 and providing you complete(d) the AoS before or on 24/05/26 your defence deadline date is 4.00 p.m. on 08/06/26

P4R5IVAL

How’s this re-write?

3. It is admitted that the Defendant was the driver of the vehicle on the material date. However, the Defendant denies that a parking contract was formed because the signage was insufficiently prominent and the alleged parking event occurred during the hours of darkness and the Defendant’s position is that the signage was inadequately illuminated, with little or no lighting within the parking bay areas. Accordingly, it is denied that the terms relied upon by the Claimant were fairly incorporated into any contract. No ParkingEye sign sets a PCN at £130, which is well above the sum allowed under the Code of Practice and above the maximum sum in Schedule 4 of POFA

Le_Kirk

If it was too dark to see the signs, how did you see "No ParkingEye sign sets a PCN at £130"? Maybe a rewrite to indicate that research was carried out in daylight AFTER receipt of the PCN.

P4R5IVAL

Would this be okay to submit?

3. It is admitted that the Defendant was the driver of the vehicle on the material date. However, the Defendant denies that a parking contract was formed because the signage was insufficiently prominent and the alleged parking event occurred during the hours of darkness and the Defendant’s position is that the signage was inadequately illuminated, with little or no lighting within the parking bay areas. Accordingly, it is denied that the terms relied upon by the Claimant were fairly incorporated into any contract. After receipt of the PCN the defendant carried out a inspection of the premise to find that no ParkingEye sign sets a PCN at £130, which is well above the sum allowed under the Code of Practice and above the maximum sum in Schedule 4 of POFA

Le_Kirk

Seems better to me.

1505grandad

"After receipt of the PCN the defendant carried out a inspection of the premise ….."

Pedantic observation - that should be "an"

P4R5IVAL

Hello, I’ve just realised that I’ve received the allocation of small claims and been instructed to complete the N180 form however I have missed the deadline, it was the 16th of august and I received the letter 30th July. Will it be automatically accepted for the claimant? I have rushed to complete it and not sure how i missed it I only noticed it when I received the defence from the claimant. I was away at the beginning of the month so that could be how it slipped by. Just wondering what might happen now?