Parking Ticket - Overstayed 6mins

Ok, I will stick to this thread, not a problem, and yes, the claim form came from Northampton.

Thanks for the link. This one works fine.

I didn't fill in the online application yet, because there's a few things I wanted to figure out first:
First thing is quite complicated - the claim is not personally for me, but rather for my mother. Her English is not that great, so I usually type stuff for her in the thread - I didn't mention it before because it didn't feel relevant (here or for the case) and for simplicity.

My partner had a similar parking ticket situation, and she recommended the forum to me. Her case didn't go further than a couple of debt collectors letters, so I hoped for the same here. Seeing the claim makes it quite more complicated - if it eventually does go to the court, my mother won't be able to defend herself, unless with a translator - but even then I have a feeling that a lot of things may get lost in translation. I was wondering that if I would be able to act on her behalf at the court (if the case went that far)?

As well as that, I also wondered if this changes anything in filing in the application, specially the parts about:
"Statement of Truth" - should I selected "I am a Litigation Friend" instead of "I am the defendant"?
Should I select "Contest Jurisdiction"? My mother is a resident in UK, so I'm still not sure if that box is relevant.

Thanks for the info. It's good to know that if it comes to it, I can represent my mother in the court.

No worries, I didn't acknowledge in my name.

Sure, that makes sense. I was just making sure.

I've sent the AOS. I will start digging in into the defense threads and will post a draft here, once I have something figured. Many thanks!

Ok, here's an updated version of the defence. The points where I added the changes are mainly 3, 4 and 5.

I also was wondering: Should I include all the photos when sending this letter (I imagine that's a yes?) and should they have be named accordingly and mentioned appropriately in the main body of the text? E.g. Appendix 1,2,3...?

---

Statement of Defence

I am XXXXX, defendant in this matter and deny liability for the entirety of the claim for the following reasons:

1. It is admitted that the Defendant was the authorised registered keeper of the vehicle in question at the time of the alleged incident.

2. The identity of the driver of the vehicle on the date in question has not been ascertained.
a) The Claimant did not identify the driver.
b) The Defendant has no liability, as they are the Keeper of the vehicle and the Claimant must rely upon the strict provisions of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 in order to hold the defendant responsible for the driver’s alleged breach.

3. The full details of the contract which it is alleged was broken have not been provided.
a) The Claimant has disclosed no cause of action to give rise to any debt.
b) The Claimant has stated that a parking charge was incurred.

The claim simply states: “The driver of the vehicle registration XXXXX incurred the parking charge(s) on XXX for breaching the terms of parking on the land at XXXXX.”

The claimant fails to comply with International Parking Community Code of Practice regarding the grace periods:
“15.1 Drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to park and read any signs so they may make an informed decision as to whether or not to remain on the site.
15.2 Drivers must be allowed a minimum period of 10 minutes to leave a site after a prepaid or permitted period of parking has expired.
15.3 The reference to 10 minutes in 15.2 above shall not apply where the period of pre-paid or permitted parking does not exceed 1 hour providing that the signage on the site makes it clear to the motorist, in a prominent font, that no grace period applies on that land.”

Parking Charge Notice was issued six minutes after the pre-paid ticket has expired, a time which is not unreasonable. This is supported by the fact that a minimum grace period of at least ten minutes after expiry of paid-for time was introduced as the standard benchmark in the UK in 2015. Both private parking Trade Bodies amended their Codes of Practice to suit; a fact that this Claimant and their legal representative, Gladstones, is well aware of, given that Gladstones is run by the same controlling minds behind the IPC.

This operator is in breach of the IPC code of Practice in issuing this charge after just six minutes (a time not even proven because the operator's watch is not routinely synchronised to the Pay and Display machines).

Signage on the land does not state that Grace Periods do not comply on the particular parking area at XXXXX [image of signage on the parking].


4. The defendant wrote to the claimant two different occasions (on XXXX and XXXX) trying to appeal and resolve the situation. The defendant asked for:
i) Full particulars of the parking charges
ii) Who the party was that contracted with ES Parking.
Iii) The full legal identity of the landowner
iv) A full copy of the contract with the landholder that demonstrated that ES Parking had their authority.
v) If the charges were based on damages for breach of contract and if so to provide justification of this sum
vi) If the charge was based on a contractually agreed sum for the provision of parking and If so to provide a valid VAT invoice for this 'service'.
vii) To provide a copy of the signs that ES Parking can evidence were on site and which contended formed a contract with the driver on that occasion, as well as all photographs taken of the vehicle in question.

The claimant has not responded to any of the letters, despite the fact that postal service is their preferred way of receiving correspondence. According to Interpretations Act 1987, I believe that the appeals I send to the claimant were received but simply ignored. The claimant withheld any relevant photos of the car, particularly the windscreen and dashboard, and the signage terms, despite being asked for by the Defendant at the outset. It’s against the SRA code as well as contrary to the ‘overriding objective’ in the pre action protocol. As Gladstones are a firm of solicitors whose Directors also run the IPC Trade Body and deal with private parking issues every single day of the week, there can be no excuse for these omissions.


5. The Claimant’s solicitors are known to be a serial issuer of generic claims similar to this one, with no due diligence, no scrutiny of details nor even checking for a true cause of action.
HMCS have identified over 1000 similar poorly produced claims and the solicitor's conduct in many of these cases is believed to be currently the subject of an active investigation by the SRA. This, and the fact that the claim did not mention the reason for the parking charge, other than, what seems to be a generic formula, makes this claim look like one of the ‘robo-claims’ - a term that is being increasingly used for such conduct. Practices such as this are against the public interest, it demonstrates a disregard for the dignity of the court and is unfair on unrepresented consumers. I have reason to believe that this is a claim that will proceed without any facts or evidence supplied until the last possible minute, to my significant detriment as an unrepresented Defendant.

I suggest that parking companies using the small claims track as a form of aggressive, automated debt collection is not something the courts should be seen to support.


6. ES Parking Enforcements are not the lawful occupier of the land. I have the reasonable belief that they do not have the authority to issue charges on this land in their own name and that they have no rights to bring this case.
a) The Claimant is not the landowner and is merely an agent acting on behalf of the landowner and has failed to demonstrate their legal standing to form a contract.
b) The claimant is not the landowner and suffers no loss whatsoever as a result of a vehicle parking at the location in question
c) The Claimant is put to proof that it has sufficient interest in the land or that there are specific terms in its contract to bring an action on its own behalf. As a third party agent, the Claimant may not pursue any charge. I have the reasonable belief that they do not have the authority to issue charges on this land in their own name and that they have no right to bring action regarding this claim.


7. The Claimant has sent threatening and misleading demands which stated that further debt recovery action would be taken to recover what is owed by passing the debt to a ‘local’ recovery agent (which suggested to the Defendant they would be calling round like bailiffs) adding further unexplained charges of £25 to the original £100 with no evidence of how this extra charge has been calculated. No figure for additional charges was 'agreed' nor could it have formed part of the alleged 'contract' because no such indemnity costs were quantified on the signs. Terms cannot be bolted on later with figures plucked out of thin air, as if they were
incorporated into the small print when they were not. This appears to be an added cost with no apparently no qualification and an attempt at double recovery, which the POFA Schedule 4 specifically disallows.
b) The Defendant also disputes that the Claimant has incurred £50 solicitor costs.
c) The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant has not incurred £50 costs to pursue an alleged £100 debt.
d) Notwithstanding the Defendant's belief, the costs are in any case not recoverable.
e) The Claimant described the charge of £50.00 "legal fees" not "contractual costs".
CPR 27.14 does not permit these to be recovered in the Small Claims Court.

The Protection of Freedom Act Para 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper.



DEFENDANT DECLARATION

I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true.


Signed by the Defendant


………………………………….

I would defend this as driver if I were her. Not get tied up in knots as 'keeper' in this case.

In this case I have removed the 2nd point in the defense and changed the #1 to:

1. It is admitted that the Defendant was the authorised registered keeper and the driver of the vehicle in question at the time of the alleged incident.

Yes.

I have added it in the 5th point (as in previous post).


I guess that in this case this is it? It's just a matter of filling in the blanks?
This: http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5546325 explains that at this stage I just need to send the defence and later (point #5 - Witness Statement) I will have to file all the documents. In that case how can I reference the photos in the defence? Or I just don't and later I simply file the evidence?



Also, RedX earlier in this thread mentioned that:

(the case) could be "dropped" beforehand, meaning it may never get in front of a judge in person. there is a long way to go before any court appearance

But other threads such us "Court Claim Procedure" just talks about one thing after the other. Doesn't really mention that it can be dropped. Basically, you got the claim = you go to the court.