Parking Eye - County Court Claim Form

You can check if it is real as there will be a number for you to log onto the court website to file your acknowledgment and enter your defence. But as Guys Dad says, parking eye are issuing lots of claims at the moment so it is almost certainly a real claim.

dgwave73 wrote: »

So all the advice to ignore all the letters hasnt done me much good!
What next? Acknowldege receipt of the claim and put up a defence?

The advice changed around February when POPLA appeals started to get off the ground. Things move on, advice changes, and no-one has a crystal ball - Parking Eye has only been issuing court claims for the past two months.

There is a lot of advice on here.

Basically you must file an acknowledgment to the court action within 14 days. This extends the time for filing the defence to 28 days in total.

Did you pay for the pizza by card? Or do you still have the receipt (unlikely I know). If you do have some form of proof that you ate there on that day, take it, with a copy of the court claim, and speak to the manager (not a waiter or the person on the till). The manager has the power to cancel the charge, so that is your first port of call.

Next read the POPLA decisions thread above, start with the recent ones and work backwards but don't go back more than three or four months. Look at the points of law raised in the appeals. Court proceedings are not the same as POPLA, but a lot of the legal arguments are transferrable.

Next look at the letter before action they sent you before they issued legal proceedings. It must comply with the Practice Direction on Pre-action Conduct (see below). In fact one of the things they must do is to tell you about the Practice Direction and then they must follow certain steps before starting proceedings. PE's LBA's are non-compliant as they don't want you to know about the Practice Direction, and they don't want to give you the information contained in the Practice Direction. If the LBA is not compliant and the PPC has not taken the steps required iin the PD you can ask the court to stay the proceedings to allow the parties to comply with the PD under para 4 of the PD

Here is the full text of The Practice Direction on Pre-action Conduct, Annex A Para 2:

2. Claimant’s letter before claim
2.1
The claimant’s letter should give concise details about the matter. This should enable the defendant to understand and investigate the issues without needing to request further information. The letter should include –
(1) the claimant’s full name and address;
(2) the basis on which the claim is made (i.e. why the claimant says the defendant is liable);
(3) a clear summary of the facts on which the claim is based;
(4) what the claimant wants from the defendant;
(5) if financial loss is claimed, an explanation of how the amount has been calculated; and
(6) details of any funding arrangement (within the meaning of rule 43.2(1)(k) of the CPR) that has been entered into by the claimant.
2.2
The letter should also –
(1) list the essential documents on which the claimant intends to rely;
(2) set out the form of ADR (if any) that the claimant considers the most suitable and invite the defendant to agree to this;
(3) state the date by which the claimant considers it reasonable for a full response to be provided by the defendant; and
(4) identify and ask for copies of any relevant documents not in the claimant's possession and which the claimant wishes to see.
2.3
Unless the defendant is known to be legally represented the letter should –
(1) refer the defendant to this Practice Direction and in particular draw attention to paragraph 4 concerning the court's powers to impose sanctions for failure to comply with the Practice Direction; and
(2) inform the defendant that ignoring the letter before claim may lead to the claimant starting proceedings and may increase the defendant's liability for costs.

Also a pre May PE PCN from PE does not comply with PoFA as it does not identify the creditor. Which means they cannot pursue the registered keeper, so if you are the registered keeper (and not a driver who was earlier named by the registered keeper) they have no legal right to pursue you.

You will find lots of other strings to your defence on the POPLA thread.

dgwave73 wrote: »

thanks for the advice so far - very thorough. I am slightly confused now though. I ignored the parking eye letters right from the start so have never submitted any appeal to them. Is it right that i can no longer go to popla without having done this.

yes, you are already in the court process, but the ppc is supposed to offer you adr as part of the court process. in practice pe refuse to do this, but it is a point worth flagging up to the court.

also, you mention a thread defence info on the popla thread but i can't see the thread link - can you re-post?

will do

do i stand much of a chance of a defence by having not entered my reg in the foyer computer (as per the signage) despite being a paying customer?

pe do not progress ever case to a court hearing. It only costs them £15 to issue a claim, so they are using the court process as an additional method of extorting people to pay up. Some people pay up, some people ignore - in which case pe wins by default - some people defend and from those defences pe pick and choose which cases to take to court. Logically they are less likely to take a well defended case to court than a weak one. But there are never any guarantees


is it still worth a visit to the restaurant to speak to the manager about the charge notice at source?

yes, absolutely, do it now - yell them you are appalled that you are getting 'fined' and taken to court for spending money in their restaurant, just because you made a simple mistake and that if this isn't sorted out you and all your friends will be eating elsewhere in future be calm and polite, but firm


also, as you say "a pre may pe pcn from pe does not comply with pofa as it does not identify the creditor" can this form part of the defence?

yes, along with many other points


many thanks again.

Here is the link to the POPLA decisions thread - start here and work backwards, have a read of the appeals and the legal points that are made. These are not defences to court actions, but the law they refer to is relevant to your defence

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/forumdisplay.php?f=163

,

I'm a bit annoyed, I got rid of my LBA some time ago and it appeared to contain none of the information criteria listed by zzz.

I think the reason for Parking Eye starting to issue Court proceedings is because of all the agro over on Aldi's Facebook page aimed (in)directly at them.

A standard and robust defense should make sure to mention case Law such as VCS v. Ibbotson where a Judge ordered VCS to prove that there was a legal Act that allowed them to act on behalf of a landowner in forming a contract between the landowner and the land user. VCS never did come back to prove they had the right to act in such a manner.

What is really needed is for someone like ZZZLD to prepare a standard defense that can be used to defend against PPC Court action.

Btw, you can apply to have the case 'struck-out' (I believe that is the correct term), but this may annoy P/E even more.