Good

You do not await their next move...

Hi didy you get a defense in on this one my friend has got the exact same claim

Got a claim for apparently wheel was slightly on white line.

He needs help with a defense claim is exactly same as yours.

Thanks

has your friend got photographic evidence of the claim he parked outside the marked bay?

Start a new thread because it will save confusion on this one.

His defence wont be exactly the same, it may well be very similar so read up on a number of parking threads involving court so you get an idea of what generally happens and what each side is supposed to do.

Get you friend to write an account here so we arent playing Chinese whispers.

Hi didy you get a defense in on this one my friend has got the exact same claim

Got a claim for apparently wheel was slightly on white line.

He needs help with a defense claim is exactly same as yours.

Thanks

you need to start a new thread

this one is for advising UC.

hi

could anyone help with a simple defence

over 2 years ago my friend parked his car and paid for his parking ticket,

a few weeks later he got a letter from parking awareness saying part of his wheel was on the white line

he has ignored all correspondence from this company,

apparently they have a camera on this one spot because they know its a tight handle to park.

roll on 2 years they have now issued a claim through bw legal.

we have read loads of complaints about this but cant find a suitable defence.

particulars of their claim.

1.the claimants claim is for the sum of £100. being monies due from the defendant to the claimant in respect of a parking charge notice (PCN) issued on __/08/2016 at time at reads ave Blackpool. The PCN relates to car under registration ***********.

2.the terms of the PCN allowed the defendant 28 days from the issue to pay the PCN.

but the defendant failed to do so.

3.despite demands having been made the defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability.

4.the claim also includes interest section 69 act at rate of 8% per annum a daily rate of 0.02 from 13/08/16.

5.The claimant also claims £60 contractual cost pursuant to PCN terms and conditions.

total claim £233.00

my friend has acknowledged the claim on Mcol so he needs a defence especially with this contractual cost.

thanks guys CPR31.4 sent to solicitors

Moved to the correct forum

Have you sent the specific ppc 31:14 from this forum

Two line defence is in most claimform threads here

What is the date top right of the form

thanks for the reply date on the claim is 27nd september claim acknowledged on the 2nt october.

Good ages yet then

Did you send the ppc version of cpr 31:14

Yes we did today

so BWL usual roboclaim with no mention as to why they are suing such as what contractual term you have breached or whether it si money due as a result of a contractual condition ( 2 separate things) also they dotn say in what capacity they are suing but it is presumed to be the driver as they cant add the £60 unicorn food tax where they rely on keeper liability, the law says so.

you wont get a response from the CPR 31.14 and that is good as you can then mention that in your outline defnec by stating they ahvent shown any authority that assigns them the right to enter into contracts adn make civil claims so you aver that they do not have the permissions and thus no locus standi.

Chances are all the paperwork will get filed and not read until later but if you are lucky the court will give a case management order forcing them to show their authorities or have the claim dismissed. They often give up at this point, not necessarily because they dont have some permission but because they dotn want their shaky contracts made public as then everyone who gets a similar demand will just tell them to get lost. They rely on fraud, misdirection and bluff to make their money, not a simple contractual agreement

Blackpool seems to be the target at the moment. I have seen quite a few cases.

Can you say which car park it was. There are two. There is one behind an hotel which is easily missed and the other is next to Norwood hotel. This is the one I suspect is the one you used. If so, the contract has changed hands. It was ran by North West Car Parks Ltd (NWCP) which now means the signs will have changed. As far as I am aware PA have a court record of zero. I suspect that as they get closer to the court date, they will back off.

Were you just visiting? If so, getting up to date photos is going to be hard. As PA are members of the IPC they don't normally follow PoFA 2012 which means that they can only go after the driver, not the keeper.

A few more checks on the company is needed. Planning Permission for the signs being one.

The site is located at 48 reads Avenue and there are no planning applications going back to 2011

hi all thanks for the reply ...my mates just away at the moment i will ask him which car park it was.. we was going to drive there on Wednesday we are only half hour away.

we wanted to take photos of the PCN notices and the width of the white lines.

he also noted it was night time when he parked and visibility wad not good

when will the best time to get the defence in ?

yes he was visiting and stayed over night with grand children ...

not till day 33

might be best to get the info too and fill this out please

then there wont be any slip ups:

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?465231-Received-a-Court-Claim-From-A-Private-parking-Speculative-invoice-How-To-Deal-With-It-HERE***Updated-Aug-2016***

Name of the Claimant ? PARKING AWARENESS SERVICES

claimants Solicitors: BW LEGAL

Date of issue – 27TH SEPT

What is the claim for –

1.the claimants claim is for the sum of £100. being monies due from the defendant to the claimant in respect of a parking charge notice (PCN) issued on __/08/2016 at time at reads ave car park Blackpool. The PCN relates to car under registration ***********.

2.the terms of the PCN allowed the defendant 28 days from the issue to pay the PCN.

but the defendant failed to do so.

3.despite demands having been made the defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability.

4.the claim also includes statutory interest persuant to section 69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum a daily rate of 0.02 from 13/08/2016 to 26/09/2018 being an amount of £23.23.

5.The claimant also claims £60 contractual cost pursuant to PCN terms and conditions.

total claim £233.00

What is the value of the claim? £258.23

Has the claim been issued by the Private parking Company or was the PCN assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim ? PARKING COMPANY

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? NO

Hi all we need to get our defence in this week I’ve read the template defence do we admit the driver this was a claim for allegally wheel was on line all fees were paid do I ask for contract between landowner and claiment.

Thanks all

I think EB has commented on this earlier

just use the std 3 line defence.

post it up here 1st mind for checking.

by 4pm Monday

ok thanks will do

1. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of [motor vehicle]

2. the Defendant is unable to admit or deny the precise times and dates he was parked in [carpark] as he has no recollection of this. The Claimant is put to strict proof of the same.

3 the defendant contends the particulars of the claim are vague in nature as what to contractual term or a contractual condition was breached

4 It is denied that the Claimant entered into a contract with the Defendant. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the carpark is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. The proper Claimant is the landowner.

5. on the date ****i sent a CPR31.14 requesting documents mentioned in particulars of the claim.

PCN terms and conditions relating to reads lane blackpool

proof of any condition or contractual breach they would rely on in court.

contract between the landowner and the claimant.

6 BW legal have not sent any of those documents to me.

7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all."

could anyone just check this out i just need to edit a few details before submitting

thanks

that's not the std 3 line defence we use

thanks for the reply

where is the 3 line defence i cant find it.

also this is a parking awarness claim the ticket was paid for they saying it was slightly parked on a line.

thanks

just use the std 3 line defence the rest can be addressed in your WS IF it gets that far

use the search cag box of the top red toolbar

PCN Claimform.

Hi I’m struggling to find 3 line defence in the search bar ( only have mobile) also is paragraph 4 of my defence still applicable

Thanks

what do the signs at the car park say? Knwoing that will ake our lives easier.

So what happened in this case?

I ask as we have someone new taking on Parking Awareness.