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
    • SMOT34
    • By SMOT34 12th Jan 19, 9:58 PM
    • 8Posts
    • 2Thanks
    SMOT34
    Claim Form received - Defence needed
    • #1
    • 12th Jan 19, 9:58 PM
    Claim Form received - Defence needed 12th Jan 19 at 9:58 PM
    Good evening,
    Hoping your Saturday night is a little more exciting than mine, but also hoping there is enough of you still around to offer some seasoned advice…
    I received a Claim Form on Friday (from County Court Business Centre) relating to some PCNs from late 2017. Looks legit as it has a Claim No and password for MCOL.
    So far I have completed the AOS, plus issued a SAR to the DPO at the parking company, and emailed BW Legal to ask for the case to be put on hold.

    As per the advice on the Newbies Thread, this is a brand new thread (sadly no previous thread started as I stupidly didn’t appeal early on because I was following what I now know is old advice to just ignore the notices!)

    I am starting my defence and here’s where I could do with some help as obviously I want it to be watertight in case I cannot run certain aspects of my defence later.
    Reading the ‘Irrelevant Defences and How To Avoid Them’ thread I’m a little unclear where to start or what to include / not include


    Particulars of my case are:
    I got a handful of PCNs from my local station car park run by Britannia Parking. The car park is Pay and Display, plus serviced by RingGo. The reasons for the PCNs were varied and include:

    - A driver of my car paid by the RingGo app, but not first thing (patchy internet service on train then only remembering a few hours later when at work) and an inspector was obviously round while the car was not covered
    - RingGo app was down for a whole morning on one occasion, leading to a similar result as above
    - There was the odd day when the driver of my car forgot completely so no payment at all was paid
    - A driver of my car was going into work late one day so the car park was full. Parking was already paid for (paid for a week at a time via RingGo) and therefore a driver of my car parked in the only remaining space which was a ‘Premium’ spot. There are no clear and obvious ways of ‘upgrading’ your payment for these spots; I think they are only open to annual payers but there is no information at all on the car park signs.
    - My mum is also insured on my car and received a PCN (she blames old age and not getting on with RingGo!). However, I am the Registered Keeper so it has obviously come to me and not her.
    I am hoping the SAR should help me determine which of the above applies to the PCNs they are claiming for as I have the dated email receipts for all my payments via RingGo.

    Should also add the Parking Company have only sent me a Claim Form for a period of a month. I know there were more, which I received sporadically over a period of approx. 18 months, so suspect I may have more Claim Forms coming my way…

    Any help very gratefully received.

    TIA
    Last edited by SMOT34; 12-01-2019 at 10:37 PM. Reason: Advice given by reply
Page 1
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 12th Jan 19, 10:04 PM
    • 68,768 Posts
    • 80,994 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #2
    • 12th Jan 19, 10:04 PM
    • #2
    • 12th Jan 19, 10:04 PM
    handful of PCNs from my local station car park run by Britannia Parking.
    As keeper, you can't be held liable for any of them unless you've admitted who was driving and I see you can truthfully say in defence that you know your Mother and/or other relatives used the car on occasions when parking at this location, which is not 'relevant land' under the POFA.

    These will be their cases to prove it was you, and they can't. DON'T admit who was driving.

    First thing to do is carefully edit your first post throughout, to remove ''I'' from all the sentences that should say 'a driver of my car'.
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT UNLESS IN SCOTLAND OR NI
    TWO Clicks needed Look up, top of the page:
    Main site>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 12th Jan 19, 10:21 PM
    • 13,708 Posts
    • 15,005 Thanks
    KeithP
    • #3
    • 12th Jan 19, 10:21 PM
    • #3
    • 12th Jan 19, 10:21 PM
    I received a Claim Form on Friday (from County Court Business Centre)...
    Originally posted by SMOT34
    What is the Issue Date on your Claim Form?
    .
    • SMOT34
    • By SMOT34 12th Jan 19, 10:39 PM
    • 8 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    SMOT34
    • #4
    • 12th Jan 19, 10:39 PM
    • #4
    • 12th Jan 19, 10:39 PM
    First thing to do is carefully edit your first post throughout, to remove ''I'' from all the sentences that should say 'a driver of my car'.
    Originally posted by Coupon-mad
    Ah OK. Done.
    • SMOT34
    • By SMOT34 12th Jan 19, 10:44 PM
    • 8 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    SMOT34
    • #5
    • 12th Jan 19, 10:44 PM
    • #5
    • 12th Jan 19, 10:44 PM
    As keeper, you can't be held liable for any of them unless you've admitted who was driving and I see you can truthfully say in defence that you know your Mother and/or other relatives used the car on occasions when parking at this location, which is not 'relevant land' under the POFA.

    These will be their cases to prove it was you, and they can't. DON'T admit who was driving'.
    Originally posted by Coupon-mad
    Ok, thank you. I saw something on bargepole's post which said 'Not the Driver' was not a good defence

    "The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA) gave PPCs the ability to pursue vehicle keepers if the driver's identity is not known. In order to do so, their paperwork must comply with the strict wording of that legislation. If it does, then it doesn't matter whether you were driving or not, they can claim against you. If it does not (and you need to go through it with a fine toothcomb) AND you can show that you weren't driving, you can argue that they have no basis for keeper liability, and can only pursue the driver."

    Should I still use it then?
    • SMOT34
    • By SMOT34 12th Jan 19, 10:45 PM
    • 8 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    SMOT34
    • #6
    • 12th Jan 19, 10:45 PM
    • #6
    • 12th Jan 19, 10:45 PM
    What is the Issue Date on your Claim Form?
    Originally posted by KeithP
    It is 10th Jan
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 12th Jan 19, 10:48 PM
    • 68,768 Posts
    • 80,994 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #7
    • 12th Jan 19, 10:48 PM
    • #7
    • 12th Jan 19, 10:48 PM
    I saw something on bargepole's post which said 'Not the Driver' was not a good defence
    Normally not.

    But it IS in a railway car park, when at least one PCN was not you driving...!

    Railway car parks are not relevant land, read the POFA Sch 4. This is different.
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT UNLESS IN SCOTLAND OR NI
    TWO Clicks needed Look up, top of the page:
    Main site>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 12th Jan 19, 10:49 PM
    • 13,708 Posts
    • 15,005 Thanks
    KeithP
    • #8
    • 12th Jan 19, 10:49 PM
    • #8
    • 12th Jan 19, 10:49 PM
    What is the Issue Date on your Claim Form?
    Originally posted by KeithP
    It is 10th Jan
    Originally posted by SMOT34
    With a Claim Issue Date of 10th January, and having done the Acknowledgement of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Tuesday 12th February 2019 to file your Defence.

    That's a whole month away. Loads of time to produce a perfect Defence, but don't leave it to the very last minute.


    When you are happy with the content, your Defence should be filed via email as suggested here:
    1. Print your Defence.
    2. Sign it and date it.
    3. Scan the signed document back in and save it as a pdf.
    4. Send that pdf as an email attachment to CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk
    5. Just put the claim number and the word Defence in the email title, and in the body of the email something like 'Please find my Defence attached'.
    6. Log into MCOL after a few days to see if the Claim is marked "defended". If not chase the CCBC until it is.
    7. Do not be surprised to receive a copy of the Claimant's Directions Questionnaire, they are just trying to put you under pressure.
    8. Wait for your DQ from the CCBC, or download one from the internet, and then re-read post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread to find out exactly what to do with it.
    .
    • SMOT34
    • By SMOT34 12th Jan 19, 11:05 PM
    • 8 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    SMOT34
    • #9
    • 12th Jan 19, 11:05 PM
    • #9
    • 12th Jan 19, 11:05 PM
    Normally not.

    But it IS in a railway car park, when at least one PCN was not you driving...!

    Railway car parks are not relevant land, read the POFA Sch 4. This is different.
    Originally posted by Coupon-mad
    OK, clear. Thank you.

    Could you kindly point me in the right direction of the correct defence to use in that case then?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 13th Jan 19, 12:16 AM
    • 68,768 Posts
    • 80,994 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I would use bargepole's concise defence template (see NEWBIES thread for the link) and in the section about 'the facts are' have something like this:

    1. The facts are that this vehicle was insured under a policy permitting two drivers to use it, and other family members with fully comprehensive insurance were also permitted to use it. To the Defendant's knowledge, more than one family member has used this vehicle in this car park around the material times, not just the Defendant who, on the balance of probabilities, was more likely not the driver on all of the dates given.

    2. Parking at this station is common for the family, so the Defendant is unable to pinpoint who the driver actually was on each, or indeed any, of the listed occasions. The Claimant has shown no evidence and is put to strict proof of the driver(s) and how they contend the registered keeper can possibly be held liable.

    3. The Claimant has provided no evidence (in pre-action correspondence or otherwise) that the Defendant was the driver on these occasions or that any terms were breached, for that matter. The RingGo app is familiar to the Defendant and on occasions the system was inoperative, but whether or not this system failure led to any of the named PCNs is unclear, given the very sparse facts in the Particulars of Claim.

    4. The Defendant avers that due to the Claimant's failure to identify the driver, they will be limited to pursuing the Defendant under the statutory provisions set out in Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ('the POFA'). However, the Claimant is in difficulty, given the fact that this is not 'relevant land' under the definition set out in the POFA, being a site under control of railway byelaws.

    4.1. It is not admitted that the Claimant has complied with the relevant statutory requirements. Before seeking to rely on the keeper liability provisions of Schedule 4 POFA the Claimant must demonstrate:

    (i) that the site is 'relevant land', and
    (ii) that there was a ‘relevant obligation’ either by way of a breach of contract, trespass or other tort; and
    (iii) that it has followed the required deadlines and wording as described in the Act to transfer liability from the driver(s) to the registered keeper for each PCN.

    5. To the extent that the Claimant may seek to allege that any such presumption exists, the Defendant expressly denies that there is any presumption in law (whether in statute or otherwise) that the keeper is the driver. Further, the Defendant denies that the vehicle keeper is obliged to name the driver to a private parking firm. Had this been the intention of parliament, they would have made such requirements part of the POFA, which makes no such provision. In the alternative, an amendment could have been made to s.172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. The 1988 Act continues to oblige the identification of drivers only in strictly limited circumstances, where a criminal offence has been committed.

    5.1. Those provisions do not apply to this matter and nor does the POFA.
    The Claimant should have identified the drivers on each occasion and the specific breaches alleged, and sought damages if applicable, from the driver(s) only. Their failure to do so does not excuse the Claimant in now issuing a blanket claim to the registered keeper, who cannot be held liable for parking events on non-relevant land.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 13-01-2019 at 12:22 AM.
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT UNLESS IN SCOTLAND OR NI
    TWO Clicks needed Look up, top of the page:
    Main site>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
    • SMOT34
    • By SMOT34 13th Jan 19, 9:13 PM
    • 8 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    SMOT34
    I would use bargepole's concise defence template (see NEWBIES thread for the link) and in the section about 'the facts are' have something like this:
    Originally posted by Coupon-mad

    This is extremely helpful. Thank you very much.
    • SMOT34
    • By SMOT34 6th Mar 19, 3:39 PM
    • 8 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    SMOT34
    UPDATE

    ———-

    I have received a Notice of Transfer of Proceedings. Is this normal?

    Letter states the claim has been transferred to my local County Court ��
    • Le_Kirk
    • By Le_Kirk 6th Mar 19, 3:43 PM
    • 4,384 Posts
    • 3,533 Thanks
    Le_Kirk
    Yes, this is normal after you requested your local court via the DQ.
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 6th Mar 19, 3:58 PM
    • 5,007 Posts
    • 6,118 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    YEs
    In future
    Post 2 of the newbies thread has every single possible answer on process you can think of.
    • SMOT34
    • By SMOT34 6th Mar 19, 4:33 PM
    • 8 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    SMOT34
    Ah OK. So itís just an acknowledgement of that?

    Feeling all very real at the mo. Do most of these cases actually end in Court? I thought they didnít but Iím worried Iím basing that on out of date advice
    • ShakeItOff
    • By ShakeItOff 6th Mar 19, 7:38 PM
    • 368 Posts
    • 425 Thanks
    ShakeItOff
    Yes, it is just to keep you informed. It isn't anything to be concerned about. The Claimant will have received the same.

    A number of cases do go to court. It might help you to search (advanced search, searching this board only) for the term "another one bites the dust". That will show you those who have gone to court and won their cases.
    Last edited by ShakeItOff; 06-03-2019 at 8:09 PM.
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

2,235Posts Today

6,933Users online

Martin's Twitter