Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • DAVIEG9
    • By DAVIEG9 16th Apr 18, 7:52 PM
    • 4Posts
    • 1Thanks
    DAVIEG9
    Napier Parking County Court Claim
    • #1
    • 16th Apr 18, 7:52 PM
    Napier Parking County Court Claim 16th Apr 18 at 7:52 PM
    Hi all,
    I've scoured the newbie threads and I am a bit unsure of what to do.

    Driver of vehicle pulled into a Napier controlled car park in Birmingham around 7 months ago. Parking attendant knocked on window and said I needed a ticket, driver said 'no need I'm off'.
    No ticket issued.

    A week or so later I started receiving the usual letters which I ignored, but I cannot recall a letter with photographic evidence of my vehicle parked, just letters demanding payment.

    This week I've received a county court claim form from the county court business centre in Northampton, via BW Legal.
    On the same day I have also received a letter from BW Legal confirming they have issued legal proceedings.
    County Court claim is made up of;
    Principal debt, interest, court fees and Solicitors costs

    What I have gleaned from the forum so far is to login to moneyclaim.gov.uk and use the acknowledgment of service so I now have 28 days to prepare my defence. i have completed this.

    Could you guys tell me my next steps please?
    I'm not sure whether to use a template?
    Can I email a defence letter, or does it need to be posted etc?

    Any help appreciated

    Thanks
    Last edited by DAVIEG9; 16-04-2018 at 8:19 PM.
Page 1
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 16th Apr 18, 8:02 PM
    • 37,526 Posts
    • 21,736 Thanks
    Quentin
    • #2
    • 16th Apr 18, 8:02 PM
    • #2
    • 16th Apr 18, 8:02 PM
    All advice is set out for you in the Newbies FAQ thread.

    See #2 there.

    Assuming that you have not revealed who was driving then edit your post to remove details of who was driving

    The ppcs monitor this forum and can use your posts against you
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 17th Apr 18, 12:04 AM
    • 62,736 Posts
    • 75,676 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #3
    • 17th Apr 18, 12:04 AM
    • #3
    • 17th Apr 18, 12:04 AM
    This week I've received a county court claim form from the county court business centre in Northampton, via BW Legal.
    Search the forum for Napier BW Legal claim and copy & adapt another one (not a template as such, but copy & edit to suit and show us).
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 17th Apr 18, 8:42 AM
    • 3,722 Posts
    • 4,532 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    • #4
    • 17th Apr 18, 8:42 AM
    • #4
    • 17th Apr 18, 8:42 AM
    You have 33 days from date of issue of the claim form, and the court will need to have RECEIVED it by then - so you always always email them a PDF of your signed defence.
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 17th Apr 18, 9:06 AM
    • 10,247 Posts
    • 10,139 Thanks
    The Deep
    • #5
    • 17th Apr 18, 9:06 AM
    • #5
    • 17th Apr 18, 9:06 AM
    Surely this is a vexatious claim, and certainly a waste of court time.

    This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors.

    Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, and another company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each year). They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

    Hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned.

    The problem has become so rampant that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Watch the video of the Second Reading in the HofC recently.

    http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

    and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind they will be out of business by Christmas.
    Last edited by The Deep; 17-04-2018 at 9:09 AM.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • DAVIEG9
    • By DAVIEG9 19th Apr 18, 10:06 PM
    • 4 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    DAVIEG9
    • #6
    • 19th Apr 18, 10:06 PM
    • #6
    • 19th Apr 18, 10:06 PM
    Hi all,

    I have drafted a defence letter below, please let me have your feedback.

    I am a little confused - do I need to send any letters to Napier?
    Where do I send this defence to?
    Can I email it to the court?

    1. I am xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, the defendant in this matter. My address for service is xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    2. This is my statement of truth and my defence.

    3. As an unrepresented litigant-in-person I seek the Court's permission to amend and supplement this defence as may be required upon full disclosure of the claimant's case.

    4. For the avoidance of doubt on the relevant date I was the registered keeper of a XXXXXXXXX, registered number XXXXXXXXXXX.

    The claim is denied in its entirety except where explicitly admitted here. I assert that I am not liable to the Claimant for the sum claimed, or any amount at all, for the following reasons:

    5. The Claim Form issued on the XXXXXXXXXXXXXX by Napier Parking Limited was not
    correctly filed under The Practice Direction as it was not signed by a legal person but signed by “BW Legal Services Limited (Claimant’s Legal Representative)”.

    6. This Claimant has not complied with pre-court protocol. And as an example as to why this prevents a full defence being filed at this time, a parking charge can be for trespass, breach of contract or a contractual charge. All these are treated differently in law and require a different defence. The wording of any contract will naturally be a key element in this matter, and a copy of the alleged contract has never been provided to the Defendant.

    A) There was no compliant ‘Letter before County Court Claim’, under the Practice Direction.

    B) This is a speculative serial litigant, issuing a large number of identical 'draft particulars'. The badly mail-merged documents contain very little information.

    C) The Claim form Particulars were extremely sparse and divulged no cause of action nor sufficient detail. The claimant has 1080 characters yet has chosen to use only 792 (including spaces) of them.

    D) The particulars of claim give no information on the alleged “parking contravention”, nor the “FCN Terms and conditions”, signage or location maps upon which the claimant relies.

    E) The claim shows no basis for the alleged liability or as to why the claim has been brought against myself as merely the registered keeper of the vehicle.

    F) The Defendant therefore asks the Court to strike out the claim as having no reasonable prospect of success as currently drafted.

    G) Alternatively, the Defendant asks that the Claimant is required to file Particulars which comply with Practice Directions and include at least the following information;


    (i) Whether the matter is being brought for trespass, breach of contract or a contractual charge, or to state another reason entirely, and an explanation as to the exact nature of the charge
    (ii) A copy of any contract it is alleged was in place (e.g. copies of signage).
    (iii) How any contract was concluded (if by performance, then copies of signage maps in place at the time).
    (iv) Whether keeper liability is being claimed, and if so copies of any Notice to Driver / Notice to Keeper.
    (v) Whether the Claimant is acting as Agent or Principal, together with a list of documents they will rely on in this matter.
    (vi) If charges over and above the initial charge are being claimed, the basis on which this is being claimed.

    H) Once these Particulars have been filed, the Defendant asks for reasonable time to file another defence.

    7. The defendant refutes that they were the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged “parking contravention”.

    8. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 has not being complied with. The registered keeper has not been proven as the driver, as such the keeper can only be held liable if the claimant has fully complied with all of the strict requirements.

    9. The defendant asserts that no ‘notice to keeper’ was received, and therefore it is clear that the claimant has not complied with The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. The registered keeper cannot be held liable.

    10. The defendant refutes that fact that any contract was made with the driver, in the absence of any proof of adequate signage that contractually bound the driver then there can have been no contract and the Claimant has no case.

    11. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 does not permit the Claimant to recover a sum greater than the parking charge on the day before a Notice to Keeper was issued. The Claimant cannot recover additional charges. The Claimant claims a sum of £80 as a “Fixed Charge Notice (FCN)” (for which liability is denied) plus The Particulars of Claim include £54 that the claimant has untruthfully presented as contractual charges, which cannot be lawfully recovered. The defendant also has the reasonable belief that the charges have not been invoiced and/or paid.

    12. This case can be distinguished from ParkingEye v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 (the Beavis case) which was dependent upon an undenied contract, formed by unusually prominent signage forming a clear offer and which turned on unique facts regarding the location and the interests of the landowner. Strict compliance with the BPA Code of Practice (CoP) was paramount and Mr Beavis was the driver who saw the signs and entered into a contract to pay £85 after exceeding a licence to park free. None of this applies in this material case.

    13. The Defendant denies any liability whatsoever to the Claimant in any matter and asks the Court to note that the Claimant has, sent a template, well-known to be generic cut and paste 'Particulars' of claim.

    The vague Particulars of Claim disclose no clear cause of action. The court is invited to strike out the claim of its own volition as having no merit and no reasonable prospects of success.

    I confirm that the above facts and statements are true to the best of my knowledge and recollection.
    • Redx
    • By Redx 19th Apr 18, 10:12 PM
    • 19,659 Posts
    • 24,950 Thanks
    Redx
    • #7
    • 19th Apr 18, 10:12 PM
    • #7
    • 19th Apr 18, 10:12 PM
    post #2 of the newbies faq sticky thread tells you what to do including a timeline etc

    put simply , you will be printing it , signing and dating it (like the one that came in the post) , scanning it back to a laptop , saving it as a pdf and emailing it to the CCBC as an attachment , also adding the MCOL ref and name etc to the email

    see post #15 here

    https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5818329

    post #19 here

    https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5812149

    and post #33 here

    https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5823827
    Last edited by Redx; 19-04-2018 at 10:28 PM.
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
    • DAVIEG9
    • By DAVIEG9 19th May 18, 2:50 PM
    • 4 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    DAVIEG9
    • #8
    • 19th May 18, 2:50 PM
    • #8
    • 19th May 18, 2:50 PM
    Hi again,

    Ok, defence submitted online, court has sent me a letter confirming they have my defence.

    Today I've received another letter from BW Legal, stating;
    'Our client intends to continue with the claim, we confirm that we have notified the court of the same"

    Is this a generic letter sent to everyone? Or is it an acknowledgement that they have seen my defence and will contest it?
    Can they view my defence before the court date?

    Any info appreciated
    Thanks
    • Redx
    • By Redx 19th May 18, 2:53 PM
    • 19,659 Posts
    • 24,950 Thanks
    Redx
    • #9
    • 19th May 18, 2:53 PM
    • #9
    • 19th May 18, 2:53 PM
    yes, all of the above (and they have now already read the defence as the court sent it to them)


    read the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread post #2 for a timeline and sequence of events


    DQ stage comes next
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 19th May 18, 2:54 PM
    • 37,526 Posts
    • 21,736 Thanks
    Quentin
    Can they view my defence before the court date?
    Originally posted by DAVIEG9

    Yes.


    Until they see your defence there is no court date!


    (The claimant has to pay a fee for a hearing, and this isn't until they have had your defence and can decide whether or not to pay out for the hearing (if they lose they lose the court fee - if you lose you pay it!)
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 19th May 18, 10:31 PM
    • 62,736 Posts
    • 75,676 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    They got sent your defence by the CCBC, of course.

    To know what happens when, you MUST read bargepole's summary in the NEWBIES sticky thread.
    • DAVIEG9
    • By DAVIEG9 20th Jun 18, 5:00 PM
    • 4 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    DAVIEG9
    Hi again all,

    Just an update, defence submitted last month.

    Had an acknowledgement from county court that it is now a defended claim.

    I now need to complete form N180 and return, I have also received a copy from BW Legal where they wish for this case to be referred to small claims mediation service.

    Am I right in assuming that I categorically do NOT agree to mediation and just defend the claim fully?
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 20th Jun 18, 5:27 PM
    • 10,247 Posts
    • 10,139 Thanks
    The Deep
    I was in the SCC last week and the judge turned down my claim for unreasonable conduct costs. Bargepole of this Parish thinks it may be because I refused mediation.

    Others here say always refuse, but I am not so sure.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • The Slithy Tove
    • By The Slithy Tove 20th Jun 18, 6:17 PM
    • 3,430 Posts
    • 5,033 Thanks
    The Slithy Tove
    I was in the SCC last week and the judge turned down my claim for unreasonable conduct costs. Bargepole of this Parish thinks it may be because I refused mediation.

    Others here say always refuse, but I am not so sure.
    Originally posted by The Deep
    The normal argument against mediation is that the Defendant's position is that they owe nothing and won't budge, and the Claimant wants something. Therefore there will never be a meeting of minds, so what's the point.

    If you feel that having done mediation may benefit in terms of costs eventually, then you can accept. But in the actual mediation, you need to be strong, and simply repeat, "I owe nothing, anything more than zero is not acceptable," so stonewalling the whole thing. (It's OK, you don't ever confront the Claimant, it's all done via the mediator over the phone, I understand.)
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 20th Jun 18, 6:50 PM
    • 9,930 Posts
    • 10,233 Thanks
    KeithP
    I now need to complete form N180 and return, I have also received a copy from BW Legal where they wish for this case to be referred to small claims mediation service.

    Am I right in assuming that I categorically do NOT agree to mediation and just defend the claim fully?
    Originally posted by DAVIEG9
    Why don't you follow the guidance offered by Bargepole linked from post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread?

    He suggests:
    4. After sending off your Defence, the Northampton Business centre will send a copy to the Claimant, and then send a Directions Questionnaire (form N180) to both Claimant and Defendant. You must complete this by the date given, and send it back to Northampton, with a copy to the other side (or their solicitors if they've nominated one as the address for service). The recommended answers to the questions are as follows:
    • A1 = NO to mediation (they want the whole amount, you want to pay them nothing, so no scope for mediation. This will not go against you)
    • B = fill in all the details, name, address, etc
    • C1 = YES to small claims track – this is the limited costs track for claims up to £10,000 in value
    • D1 = name of your local County Court – unless you are a Ltd company, the case files will be transferred there
    • D2 = NO to expert evidence (this relates to medical negligence cases and suchlike)
    • D3 = 1 witness (that’s you) (or more if you are going to get another person to provide a statement)
    • D4 = Put down the dates of any pre-booked holidays, NO to interpreter (unless you need one).
    .
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 20th Jun 18, 8:20 PM
    • 37,526 Posts
    • 21,736 Thanks
    Quentin
    I was in the SCC last week and the judge turned down my claim for unreasonable conduct costs. Bargepole of this Parish thinks it may be because I refused mediation.

    Others here say always refuse, but I am not so sure.
    Originally posted by The Deep
    Bargepole when preaching here pro bono advocates the opposite and also says refuse.

    Why he told you the opposite is a mystery. Maybe trying to justify his fee after you lost??

    When you agree to mediation the mediator wil simplyl take the view you are "guilty", owe the money and try to get you to make an offer. No other "mediation" will be offered.
    • Castle
    • By Castle 20th Jun 18, 8:46 PM
    • 1,925 Posts
    • 2,617 Thanks
    Castle
    Bargepole when preaching here pro bono advocates the opposite and also says refuse.

    Why he told you the opposite is a mystery. Maybe trying to justify his fee after you lost??

    When you agree to mediation the mediator wil simplyl take the view you are "guilty", owe the money and try to get you to make an offer. No other "mediation" will be offered.
    Originally posted by Quentin
    Actually he won his claim, but didn't get his unreasonable costs:-
    https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5856882
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 21st Jun 18, 1:29 AM
    • 62,736 Posts
    • 75,676 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Bargepole is absolutely honourable when helping people (sometimes for free in parking cases) and clearly says that in parking cases the answer to Mediation is ''no'' because there is nothing to discuss, no debt.

    The Deep's case wasn't a parking case, so I assume with the benefit of hindsight, bargepole felt that the Judge's comments showed that mediation might have looked better for DP.
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 21st Jun 18, 6:57 AM
    • 10,247 Posts
    • 10,139 Thanks
    The Deep
    Got it in one CM. I suppose I could have agreed to a lesser figure, but the defendant was a dentist, have you any idea how much they charge for implants!
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 21st Jun 18, 8:18 AM
    • 37,526 Posts
    • 21,736 Thanks
    Quentin
    Got it in one CM. I suppose I could have agreed to a lesser figure, but the defendant was a dentist, have you any idea how much they charge for implants!
    Originally posted by The Deep
    So your case was nothing to do with private parking (thus irrelevant and off topic to this forum - and certainly off topic to post your contradictory "rethink" advice to the OP here)

    Bargepole's advice to you looks to have been based entirely on your individual hearing and presumably didn't mean or expect you to take it up and post here that others advising no to mediation over parking cases are in need of a rethink!
    Last edited by Quentin; 21-06-2018 at 8:37 AM.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

358Posts Today

5,115Users online

Martin's Twitter