Gladstones/PCM County Court

blutack · 10 April 2019 at 4:21PM

Good afternoon guys.

Firstly I'd like to say thank you, I have used this site before for advice but this is the first time I have received a County Court Summons and so the first time I have started a new thread.

I received the summons on the 7th of April, have completed my AOS on the MCOL website and am now looking to form a defence. I have a rough idea of what I am look to write from some of the other threads on similar cases but I'd like to ask for your help on really pinning it down please.

I wasn't the driver at the time the PCN was issued and I am no longer in contact with the person who was driving but I have been to the business park before and if I'm completely honest I didn't realise there were parking restrictions in the area my car was parked. On inspection the signs use diagrams instead of words to tell you where not to park and the diagrams are confusing and don't really seem to say anything at all. The 'fine' is also buried in a mass of small print and so those two points have been the basis of my defence so far.

Would it be helpful if I posted a dropbox link to a photo of the signage? Is there anything else I can upload to help the discussion?

Again, thank you very much for your help,
Blutack

Redx · 10 April 2019 at 4:48PM

no summons was sent or received

you received the N1 claim form from the CCBC, its an MCOL claim pack , not a summons, this isnt a criminal matter, so dont make it out to be

start drafting your defence and post the draft below for critique

if you want a legal opinion on your chances , consult a lawyer

we will tell you what needs doing and what you should read, we dont give legal opinions, this is not a legal aid forum , its a consumer rights forum (MARTIN LEWIS would tell you to consult a solicitor, which costs a lot of money if you engage them)

here is what CM said recently

most people can use bargepole's concise template defence from the NEWBIES thread, and add in a point or two about the facts of the case/contravention/why they are not liable.
And a point about no landowner authority as seen in other defences.

KeithP · 10 April 2019 at 5:23PM

What is the Issue Date on your Claim Form?

blutack · 10 April 2019 at 6:20PM

Ok thanks Redx, I will start drafting my defence tonight and post it up here asap.

KeithP, the Issue Date is the 4th of April. 5 days from then is when it is deemed to be received right? And then 28 days from to get my defence in?

KeithP · 10 April 2019 at 6:29PM

blutack wrote: »

KeithP, the Issue Date is the 4th of April.

With a Claim Issue Date of 4th April, you have until Tuesday 23rd April to do the Acknowledgement of Service, but there is nothing to be gained by delaying it. To do the AoS, follow the guidance offered in a Dropbox file linked from post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread. About ten minutes work - no thinking required.

Having done the AoS, you have until 4pm on Tuesday 7th May 2019 to file your Defence.

That's nearly four weeks 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:

Sign it and date it.
Scan the signed document back in and save it as a pdf.
Send that pdf as an email attachment to CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk
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'.
Log into MCOL after a few days to see if the Claim is marked "defence received". If not chase the CCBC until it is.
Do not be surprised to receive a copy of the Claimant's Directions Questionnaire, they are just trying to put you under pressure.
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.

blutack · 11 April 2019 at 9:04PM

Good evening guys,

I have attached below my first draft of the witness statement. Please pick it apart and let me know if there is anything you would add in, take out, word differently etc etc.

Thank you for your help.
===========

IN THE COUNTY COURT

CLAIM No: xxxxxxxxxx

BETWEEN:

XXXX (Claimant)

-and-

XXXX (Defendant)

________________________________________
DEFENCE
________________________________________

1. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.

2. The facts are that the vehicle, registration XXXX, of which the Defendant is the registered keeper but was not the driver, was parked on the material date in a XXXX business park on an unmarked private road.

3. The Particulars of Claim state that the Defendant XXXX was the registered keeper and/or the driver of the vehicle XXXX These assertions indicate that the Claimant has failed to identify a Cause of Action, despite being explicitly told several times I was not the driver, and is simply offering a menu of choices. As such, the Claim fails to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4, or with Civil Practice Direction 16, paras. 7.3 to 7.5.

4. Further and in the alternative, it is denied that the claimant's signage sets out the terms in a sufficiently clear manner which would be capable of binding any reasonable person reading them. They merely use diagrams to imply areas in which parking is forbidden. One diagram implies ‘no parking on yellow lines’ and another implies ‘no parking on hashed lines’, both of which there are on the site but not in the area the vehicle was parked. The postal PCN states the charge was for ‘parking within a restricted area’ but I do not believe this to be true nor do I believe the signage supports their claim.

5. The PCN was issued on a poorly signed private road. It is not clear that the site was 'private land' or being enforced by any restrictive terms, due to insufficient signage. I refer to the IPC Code of Practice (CoP) Part E, highlighting that adequate and clear entrance signs are required. On retrospective closer inspection there is an entrance sign on the boundary that can be read whilst on foot but could not be noticed nor read whilst driving onto the site and another sign that is positioned 50 yards before the boundary on a roundabout when the drivers eyes are presumably elsewhere in order to safely navigate the roundabout.

6. The terms on the Claimant's signage are also displayed in a font which is too small to be read from a passing vehicle, and is in such a position that anyone attempting to read the tiny font would be unable to do so easily. It is, therefore, denied that the Claimant's signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. The Claimant included signage from another company that is also displayed on a different area of the site that states “WARNING DO NOT PARK HERE” in large, black print. This sign, I believe, complies with the clear signage stated in the ParkingEye vs Beavis case (2015) whereas, in stark contrast, the claimants signage is wholly unclear and so does not comply.

7. The Claimant is put to strict proof that it has sufficient prorpietary interest in the land, or that it has the necessary authorisation from the landowner to issue parking charge notices, and to pursue payment by means of litigation.

8. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4, at Section 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper, in this case £100. The claim includes an additional £60, for which no calculation or explanation is given, and which appears to be an attempt at double recovery.

9. In summary, it is the Defendant's position that the claim discloses no cause of action, is without merit, and has no real prospect of success. Accordingly, the Court is invited to strike out the claim of its own initiative, using its case management powers pursuant to CPR 3.4.

I believe the facts contained in this Defence are true.

Name
Signature
Date

Redx · 11 April 2019 at 9:11PM

that is a defence , not a WS , make your mind up where you are at and what you are doing please

Coupon-mad · 11 April 2019 at 9:21PM

I refer

I believe

and another section that has ''I believe'':

but I do not believe this to be true nor do I believe

All need to be 'the Defendant refers' (or believes).

Good defence though. Says what it needs to say. But what about 'predatory ticketing and 'no grace period', which you will find in other PCM defence threads? Search the forum.

blutack · 11 April 2019 at 9:46PM

Sorry Redx, my mistake, I never meant to put witness statement. Definitely at the 'defence' stage.

Thanks Coupon-mad, I'll make those changes right now.
Good point on the 'predatory ticketing' and 'no grace period'. I haven't fully got my head around the 'no grace period' point yet but I'll go back to the forums and try to figure out the particulars and add it in.

Cheers guys.

blutack · 16 April 2019 at 8:26PM

Hi guys,

I have been doing some research on the 'predatory ticketing' and 'no grace period'. I struggled to find much on predatory ticketing other than the parking attendants being offered 'incentives' by their companies for ticketing. Should I add this in?

I have however attached below a paragraph that I have added to my defence about the grace period. I am aware the IPC don't specify what they deem acceptable as a grace period but I added that the BPA say 10 minutes minimum, as an example. Is this appropriate?

7. The Claimants client is a member of the IPC and in their Code of Conduct it states “15.1 Drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to park and read any signs so they make an informed decision as to whether or not to remain on the site”. The photographs of the defendants car were taken at XXXX and XXXX and the PCN notes that it was issued at XXXX meaning a grace period was not given and so the driver was unable to make the “informed decision whether or not to remain on site” required before being ticketed. As an example, the minimum grace period stated in the BPA Code of Conduct is 10 minutes, in this case the driver was given 40 seconds.

Thanks again for your help!

The_Deep · 17 April 2019 at 11:33AM

This is almost certainly a scam, get your MP on side. they are taking steps to put these scammers out of business.

On 15th March 2019 a Bill was enacted to curb the excesses of these private parking companies. Codes of Practice are being drawn up, an independent appeals service will be set up, and access to the DVLA's date base more rigorously policed, and persistent offenders denied access. Hopefully life will become impossible for the worst of these scammers.

Until this is done you should still complain to your MP, citing the new legislation.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/enacted

Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these Private Parking Companies.

Gladstones/PCM County Court

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free