IMPORTANT REMINDER: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information. If you are uploading images, please take extra care that you have redacted all personal information.
Received Directions Questionnaire - what next?
samsepi0l
Forumite 24 Posts
So, long story short I have a parking ticket from Britannia Parking - I don't know why. I parked at a 2 hour free space, and I don't think I've ever been there more than 20 minutes. I've ignored every single letter, until last month when I received a letter from the court.
Anyhow, I wrote up a letter of defence touching on the illegal admin fees with citations, and that I never exited my vehicle as I was on an urgent phone call so I was never technically 'parked'. I understand from this forum I shouldn't have said that as I've acknowledged that I was the driver.
Does this now mean I've lost all hope and have to pay up? Ive received the Directions Questionnaire in the post along with the Notice of Proposed Alocation to the Small Claims Track. Id be happy to post the full defence here but not sure if would be any help
Anyhow, I wrote up a letter of defence touching on the illegal admin fees with citations, and that I never exited my vehicle as I was on an urgent phone call so I was never technically 'parked'. I understand from this forum I shouldn't have said that as I've acknowledged that I was the driver.
Does this now mean I've lost all hope and have to pay up? Ive received the Directions Questionnaire in the post along with the Notice of Proposed Alocation to the Small Claims Track. Id be happy to post the full defence here but not sure if would be any help
0
Latest MSE News and Guides
Martin Lewis quizzes Rishi Sunak
Watch the cost of living support Q&A here
Join the MSE Forum discussion
Replies
The second post of the NEWBIES thread offers full guidance on how to progress through a court case, and particularly relevant to where you are, it tells you how to answer every question on your Directions Questionnaire. Follow the link to Bargepole's 'what happens when' thread for that.
Email the completed DQ to the ccbcaq email address
With Britannia they have an identity issue , read other Britannia threads to see why
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6185070/britannia-parking-canvey-island-seafront/p6
Have you emailed a SAR to the DPO at Britannia yet ? Attaching a copy of the claim form as proof of I D under the GDPR law, do it asap if not done already , plus get pictures of the signs too
If your vehicle was stationery on their private land , it was parked , even if the driver was sat in the vehicle the whole time. Technically , it WAS parked
I would love to be a fly on the wall listening to you trying to convince a judge about the legal definition of Parking
Defence as follows:
The Defendant disputes that the Claimant is entitled to relief of the sum claimed, or at all, due to abuse of process. The points below are within the scope of the Defendants own knowledge and honest belief.
Whilst parts of this defence may be familiar to the Claimant and/or their legal representatives, it would not be right for a litigant-in-person to be criticised for using all relevant resources available.
The Defendant notes that the Claimants use third party pre-written templates as standard that do not vary on a case to case basis. This statement is prepared specifically for this matter unlike the Claimants case and deals individually with the facts, the alleged contact and the quantum.
The Defendant has issued a fine on unfair grounds, given at the time the Claimant states I violated parking terms. At the time I had received an important phone call, and during the duration of this call, I was sat in the vehicle in order to comply with the Road Traffic Act and had not left the car parked at the premises, and no ticket was issued on the vehicle. Parking is the act of stopping and disengaging a vehicle and leaving it unoccupied. Therefore, it would be disingenuous to claim the vehicle was left parked.
The premises has dim lighting which in the winter months, where we have shorter daylight hours, are not visible. Furthermore, there is inadequate signage on the land to indicate there is any binding contract on which fines may be issued or one may face court.
Furthermore, the Claimants signs have vague/hidden terms and a mix of small font, such that they would be considered incapable of binding under common contract law, and would also be considered void pursuant to schedule 2 of the CRA. Consequently, it is the defendants position that no contract to pay an onerous penalty was agreed by the Driver.
The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4 at Section 4(5) states the maximum sum that may be recovered by the registered keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper. However, the Claimants have artificially inflated the value of the Claim by adding purported ‘added costs’ of £60 which the Defendant submits have not been incurred by the Claimant, as they have been variously described as ‘BW Legal Instruction Fee’, ‘Debt Collection Charge’, and more. In this instance, the Claimant is attempting double recovery of costs.
According to Ladak v DRC Locums UKEAT/0488/13/LA the Claimant can only recover the direct and provable costs of the time spent on preparing the claim in a legal capacity, not any administration cost.
The Defendant believes that the Claimant has not incurred legal costs. BW Legal boasted in Bagri v BW Legal Ltd of processing ‘millions’ of claims with an administration team, and only a handful of solicitors, the Defendant avers that no solicitor would have supervised this process on the balance of probabilities, and it would therefore be false to claim that legal costs were incurred.
I refer to claim number F5DP2D6Y, dated the 6th of December 2019, where Deputy District Judge Joseph of Warwick struck out the claim made by BWLegal in grounds of abuse of process, as the added costs were deemed unlawful. Furthermore, In the County Court at Mayors and City of London Court, Judge Shanti Mauger deemed the fee an abuse of process and unlawful. Based on this, I will be making a formal complaint to the SRA (Solicitors Regulation Authority) for abuse of process.
Should this claim continue, the Claimant will no doubt try to mislead the court by pointing to their Trade Association ‘ATA’ Code of Practice (‘CoP’) that now includes a clause ‘allowing' added costs/damages. The CoP is a self-serving document, written in the parking firms’ interests. Further, the ‘admin fee’ model was reportedly the proud invention of a member of the BPA Board, Gary Osner, owner of ZZPS and whose previous firm, Roxburghe (UK) Limited, folded after being declared ‘unfit’ by the Office of Fair Trading who refused to renew their consumer credit licence due to ‘unfair and misleading’ business practices.
Mr Osner states in an article in the public domain since 2018 **link omitted** ''I created the model of ‘admin fees’ for debt recovery because ticket value was so low that nobody would make any money. Parking is business and business is about money, after all.''
In summary, it is the Defendants position that the claim is without merit, and has no real prospect of success. The claimant particulars disclose no legal basis for the sum claimed, and the abuse of process taints this Claim.
The Claimant should have known that an exaggerated claim where the alleged ‘debt’ exceeds the £100 as per the ATA Code of Practice ceiling for a private PCN is disallowed under the CPRs, the Beavis case, the POFA and the CRA.
Accordingly, the court is invited to strike out the claim of its own initiative, using its case management powers pursuant to CPR 3.4, and to end the case without a hearing.
It may be useful in future in order to target the WS against any suitable Defence points such as the landowner contract being in one name and ltd company and the claimant being a different name and company
Plus signage , lighting , false charges (double recovery) etc
What are the breakdown of costs and total being claimed ? If it's more than £200 it's been falsely inflated
Breakdown as per claim form is
- Amount claimed: £165.48
- Court Fee: £25
- Legal representatives costs: £50
- Total Amount: £250.48
In the Particulars of Claim:POFA
Poor and inadequate signage
The CRA 2015
The relevant CoP
Etc
My understanding is, even though Ive only just sent off the SAR to Britannia, I should receive it well in advance before the witness statement, which gives me time to prepare. I don't even know if the ticket is for over staying, it might be something else which doesn't help much...