Parking charge in Scotland, pursued down to England

IapetusWhiplash

Hello all, looking for some Scotland-specific advice on defending a parking charge, please forgive any newbie errors. I've read through the newbie post and post #2 on small claims. The background of the case is as follows:

• Claimant: Horizon Parking Limited
• Solicitor: DBC Legal
• Court: Civil National Business Centre, Northampton
• Issue date: 20 Oct 2026
• Deemed date of service: 25 Oct 2026
• Date of alleged contravention: Mar 2023
• Car park: Scottish retail park (ANPR)
• I am the registered keeper, the driver has not been identified at any stage and I will not be naming the driver.
• The original PCN was ignored as per Scotland resident advice. The debt collector letters only started when I moved down to England. I haven't sent responses at any point, nor made any contact.

I have now received a Claim Form and will be filing the Acknowledgement of Service on MCOL shortly. Full text of the Particulars Of Claim:

• The Defendant (D) is indebted to the Claimant (C) for a Parking Charge (PC) issued to xxxx at xxxx
• The date of contravention is xx/03/2023 and the D was issued with a PC by the Claimant
• The Defendant is pursued as the driver of the vehicle for breach of the terms on the signs (the contract). Reason: Vehicle Remained on Private Property In Breach Of The Displayed T&Cs.
• In the alternative the Defendant is pursued as the keeper pursuant to POFA 2012, Schedule 4.
• AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS
• £xxx.00 being the total of the PC and damages.
• Interest at a rate of 8.00% per annum pursuant to s.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 from the date hereof at a daily rate of £0.01 until judgment or sooner payment.
• Costs and court fees

Seeing the Scotland-specific point on the newbies post, I have not tried complaining to the shop(s) of the retail park yet, as I am unsure who it would best apply to in a shared car park. Q1: Presumably it's too late for a complaint to be of any use at this stage?

On drafting a defence, I read these comments on a similar thread (https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/80426018#Comment_80426018?utm_source=community-search&utm_medium=organic-search&utm_term=too+complicated+to+pursue+parking+charge+scotland+england):

As already pointed out, the parking event happened in Scotland, so there is no keeper liability. So it doesn't matter where you live for that still to be the case. Tell PE exactly that.

Any legal action would need to be done through the Scottish Sheriffs court, so notwithstanding the difficulty presented by point #1, the fact that you reside in England makes it outside the jurisdiction of the Scottish courts (correct me if I am wrong here). This would doubly make PE put this in the "too complicated to pursue" pile.

Q2: What would the best defence be here for paragraph 3 of the template? Does the "no keeper liability" still stand?

Also I was reading posts about notifying of a change of address and requesting the old one be erased. Q3: Is that also something I should be emailing to DCB alongside preparing the defence?

Many thanks in advance!

sheenas

It's an interest question, but I suspect that claim for non payment of a contract could be pursued within the UK not just Scotland. The question does English law apply is likely to be down to the wording of the contract you have been deemed to have entered. Unless otherwise stated then it's likely to be Scottish rules. specifically focusing on the fact that the English statutory framework cannot automatically be applied to a historical event if it occurred under a different jurisdiction IMHO, but i would take advice on this point and i'm not familiar with the English system. You can do your response now and you should have time to decide your defence.

Coupon-mad

You could apply for a strike out because the alleged contract was made outside of the jurisdiction of the English courts.

MrJenkinsEsq

I think both courts have jurisdiction, England by domicile and Scotland as the place of performance (Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982, Schedule 4, rules 1 and 3(a)). An English court could presume unproved Scots law is the same as English law (FS Cairo (Nile Plaza) LLC v Brownlie [2021] UKSC 45).

But, POFA itself says Schedule 4 extends to England and Wales only (sections 56(1) and 119(1)(e)), so there can't be keeper liability for a Scottish car park in either jurisdiction. I don't see a technical reason they can't bring the claim, however hopeless it might appear to be.

A court can decline to hear it if Scotland is the natural forum, which the Court of Appeal has said still works between England and Scotland (Cook v Virgin Media Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 1287). With both parties now in England I suspect it would fail. No harm in inviting it anyway.

I wouldn't mention Scots law or Scotland having no POFA because that becomes something you have to prove, whereas POFA's own extent provision does the job under English law without proving anything. You could use something like this for your paragraph 3:

The car park is in Scotland. If Scotland is the more appropriate forum the Defendant invites the court to strike out the claim of its own initiative (Cook v Virgin Media Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 1287). Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 extends to England and Wales only (sections 56(1) and 119(1)(e)). The Act applies according to where the land is, not where the claim is issued, so the alternative claim against the Defendant as keeper fails. The Claimant must therefore prove that the Defendant was the driver. The driver has not been identified and keeper status is no evidence of who was driving. A keeper has no obligation to name the driver, under POFA or otherwise, and no adverse inference arises from not doing so (Vehicle Control Services Ltd v Edward, Teesside Combined Court, HHJ Gargan, 2023, on appeal from claim H0KF6C9C). No other basis for keeper liability is pleaded.

MrJenkinsEsq

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82178503#Comment_82178503

Jurisdiction and governing law are different questions. The sign doesn't decide which law applies, there would be no choice of law clause on it. The keeper hasn't been deemed to enter anything, only the driver could have done that.

Bazarius

Jackson Yamba said on LinkedIn 5 months ago ;

“I have assisted a client with an application to contest jurisdiction and strike out on the basis that the alleged contravention took place in Scotland but proceedings were brought here in England. The claim was brought by UK Car Park Management Ltd represented by BW Legal Services Ltd. This is an interesting case. I will keep you informed about the outcome.”

BW legal discontinued the claim .

MrJenkinsEsq

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82179036#Comment_82179036

Do you know how he formed his argument for it? From a purely point of interest view it's a shame they discontinued. I'd be intrigued to see the outcome.

Bazarius

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82179150#Comment_82179150

I have no insight in what was pleaded . However- further comment on his thread states ;

“Respectfully, the issue is not whether an English court is capable of hearing the claim in abstract terms, but whether England is the proper forum for the determination of a dispute arising wholly within Scotland.

In this matter, the alleged contract was formed in Scotland, the alleged breach occurred in Scotland, and the material facts giving rise to the cause of action are said to have arisen entirely within Scotland. Those are highly material connecting factors when considering jurisdiction and forum.

The application therefore concerns established principles relating to territorial jurisdiction, proper forum, and the appropriateness of proceedings being issued in England in respect of an alleged Scottish contravention. Ultimately, the court will determine whether jurisdiction should properly be exercised in the circumstances of this case.”

Coupon-mad

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82179018#Comment_82179018

Very good wording. 🙂

The case will be discontinued in 2027 anyway but due to this in the POC…

"Reason: Vehicle Remained on Private Property In Breach Of The Displayed T&Cs."

… slot the above wording into the Chan & Akande defence found in the DCB Legal CPP ParkingEye claim group thread and also add a sentence to para 2 that the PCN has been enhanced by £10.