As the registered keeper,

a PCC was issued on July 2015 via post from ANPR controlled car park with pay and display.

I sent an appeal to Parking Eye with help of the forum and was given a POPLA code.

I attempted to appeal via POPLA,

but this was during the period of change from London Council to Ombudsman Services.

A letter was sent from POPLA stating I will be contacted to submit my evidence in due course.

Despite this I received a Letter Before County Council Claim.

To which I sent a reply, stating I was awaiting an opportunity to submit evidence to POPLA.

I received no reply and then got my County Court Form (N1) – stating that I have not taken my opportunity to appeal.

I have taken the following action:

1) Complaint to POPLA - no opportunity to submit evidence – I have evidence from POPLA I submitted by intention

2) Acknowledged the County Court Claim to extend to 28 days for defence

3) Prepared a skeleton defence

4) Sent a letter to ParkingEye (Free proof of Postage) with CPR 31.14 requesting the following:

a. Contract with the landowner that demonstrates the right to enter into contracts and make claims in ParkingEye’s own name

b. Data that shows the parking event

c. Signage map

d. Terms and conditions

5) Taken photographs of the signage at the car park

My questions:

1) Can I defend by stating that due to administration errors at POPLA that I was denied the opportunity to appeal?

2) Are they required to prove as stated on the County Court Papers – ‘no valid ticket’ - as the system involves entering your reg into the machine?

3) On my defence, can I use The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013. Does ANPR-controlled care park, count as ‘Automated Premise?’

Yes, you have bee denied access to an ADR (alternative disputes resolution) and so you can ask the court to refer the matter back to POPLA or ombudsman services. An explanation of why would help.

The no valid ticket bit will mean that they must provide evidence by way of photograph/anpr and registration entered into machine records that you hadnt purchased a ticket and parked. Just entering the wrong details isnt good enough for them to sue as you had paid the prescribd fee and the error of putting the wrong car reg details is "de minimis" or so minor that you cant be considered as in breach of contract.

PE v Beavis decision comes into play on the last point so the clarity of the signage and whether the core terms are sufficiently clear to stand scrutiny as a contract will come into play. If the signage or contract needs reams of other minor points or references to other signs or conditions then it will fail to be binding and may well not be a contract at all but an "invitation to treat". PE are getting better at doing things properly so the exact wording on the signage and what constitutes a breach of a core term is the important bit.

Yes, you have bee denied access to an ADR (alternative disputes resolution) and so you can ask the court to refer the matter back to POPLA or ombudsman services. An explanation of why would help.

The no valid ticket bit will mean that they must provide evidence by way of photograph/anpr and registration entered into machine records that you hadnt purchased a ticket and parked. Just entering the wrong details isnt good enough for them to sue as you had paid the prescribd fee and the error of putting the wrong car reg details is "de minimis" or so minor that you cant be considered as in breach of contract.

PE v Beavis decision comes into play on the last point so the clarity of the signage and whether the core terms are sufficiently clear to stand scrutiny as a contract will come into play. If the signage or contract needs reams of other minor points or references to other signs or conditions then it will fail to be binding and may well not be a contract at all but an "invitation to treat". PE are getting better at doing things properly so the exact wording on the signage and what constitutes a breach of a core term is the important bit.

I have contacted BPA in regards to my appeal - fingers-crossed!

the BPA will disown the whole thing unless you have made it clear that it is a complaint that will come back to haunt them when you name them as a party in your actions, you contact the court and ombudsman services and COMPLAIN to the latter about the abuse of process.

Get your CPR 31.15 demand for sight of the contract with the landowner and copy of the POPLA decision or correspondence where they have been specifically told that the matter is no longer in abeyance.

Create enough of a stink and they will have to withdraw the claim.

Copy letters to your MP, they are due to discuss parking matters for a new regulation so this abuse will make them sit up and think a bit

the BPA will disown the whole thing unless you have made it clear that it is a complaint that will come back to haunt them when you name them as a party in your actions, you contact the court and ombudsman services and COMPLAIN to the latter about the abuse of process.

Get your CPR 31.15 demand for sight of the contract with the landowner and copy of the POPLA decision or correspondence where they have been specifically told that the matter is no longer in abeyance.

Create enough of a stink and they will have to withdraw the claim.

Copy letters to your MP, they are due to discuss parking matters for a new regulation so this abuse will make them sit up and think a bit

Thanks for the support. I have complained to POPLA (Ombudsman Service) despite stating that this was due to an admin oversight on their part (plus refusal of their first reply) - no dice. Still waiting for a reply from BPA. I am planning to submit my defence - stating that I am still open to ADR/POPLA to ensure resolution as my first point.

Is it ok to send a second CPR31.14 - as to include a copy of the POPLA decision?

Was wondering about sending a without prejudice letter - stating I want new POPLA code and they are not compliance with Code of Practice. To encourage the case to be dropped?

never send a without prejudice letter as it doesnt mean what it says. I wouldnt be sending anything to PE other than copies of your requests to court to have the claim struck out for abuse of process and failing to comply with CPR 31.15, thus wasting the courts time

I was thinking of sending the following letter:

To whom it may concern:

I wish to request that the above case is deemed not appropriate for court for the following reasons:

1) I have initially appealed directly to the claimant with regards the parking charge. This was rejected and they redirected me to their alternative dispute resolution (ADR) - POPLA as per British Parking Association Code of Practice. On 05/09/2016, I submitted my intention to appeal to POPLA. I was advised via email correspondence from POPLA, that they were unable to process my appeal at this time as they were in the process of change of administration from London Councils to Ombudsman Services. They stated they would contact me at later date to submit evidence to complete my appeal. I have to date received no correspondence from POPLA to request the evidence to complete my appeal. In postal response to my Letter Before County Court Claim, I stated that I was still awaiting an opportunity to submit my evidence to POPLA. I received no direct reply from the claimant and later received my county court claim form. As I was open to ADR and through administration errors out of my control, I request this case be redirected to POPLA for resolution.

2) The claimant has been sent a postal request with proof of postage, CPR 31.14 to enable me to formulate a defence. As to date, no reply has been received from the claimant.

Best Regards,

you need to make it clear that the matter is still in abeyance for consideration by POPLA (that is now being sorted out) and so PE are abusing the courts by starting a claim when the matter is still being considered by an ADR so they are effectivey using 2 legal pathways simultaneously.