db_mb
Registered UsersChange your profile picture
-
Posts
16 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Reputation
0 Neutral-
I rang the council, however, they said that all the planning enquiries are dealt through email only. Sent them an email after and still waiting for them to respond. May fire a reminder email if I do not receive by end of Monday. Also received the notice of N180 directions questionnaire in the post and below is how I plan to respond: C1 Do you agree that the small claims track is the appropriate track for this case? (yes) D1 At which county court hearing centre would you prefer the small claims hearing to take place and why? (Cardiff) D2 Are you asking for the court's permission to use the written evidence of an expert? (no) D3 How many witnesses, including yourself, will give evidence on your behalf at the hearing? (0) D4 Are there any days within the the next six months when you, an expert or a witness will not be available to attend court for the hearing? ( 17-25 November) Will you be using an interpreter at the hearing either for yourself or for a witness? (no) Any help would be much appreciated!! Thanks a lot
-
ParkingEye have obviously failed to respond to my CPR 31 request. Below is the defence that I have prepared: Defence: The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 1. Paragraph 2 is denied. It s denied that I ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 3 are denied. 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 only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. The claimant is not in a position to state if I was the driver at the time. 4. It is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Not withstanding the above on 28 July 2021 I made a request pursuant to CPR 31.14 for the claimant to disclose its necessary evidence in support if its claim. To this date the claimant has failed to respond to said request Therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to evidence its cause of action and contractual costs and what loss it has suffered. The Claimant is further put to strict proof that it has sufficient proprietary 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. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the recovery or any recovery at all. Really appreciate all the help. Many Thanks!!
-
Thank you for your quick response. Name of the Claimant : PARKINGEYE LTD Claimants Solicitors: n/a Date of issue – 19 Jul 2021 Date for AOS - 6 Aug 2021 Date to submit Defence - 20 Aug 2021 What is the claim for – 1.Claim for monies outstanding from the Defendant in relation to a Parking Charge (reference xxxxxx/xxxxxx) issued on 25/10/2019. 2.The signage clearly displayed throughput University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff - Staff 4, Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 4XW states that this is private land, managed by ParkingEye Ltd, and that it is subject to terms and consitions, including authorisation being required for parking, by which those who park agree to be bound (the contract). 3.ParkingEye's ANPR system captured vehicle xxxxx entering and leaving the site on 22/10/2019, and parking without authorisation. Pursuant to Sch 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, notice has been given to the registered keeper, making them liable for the Parking Charge payable upon breach." What is the value of the claim? £155.00 Amount Claimed £70.00 court fees £35.00 legal rep fees £50.00 Total Amount £155.00
-
I received a Claim Form issued on 19 Jul 2021. The claimant is ParkingEye Limited. The alleged offence took place on 22/10/2019. The particulars of claim read as follows: 1.Claim for monies outstanding from the Defendant in relation to a Parking Charge (reference xxxxxx/xxxxxx) issued on 25/10/2019. 2.The signage clearly displayed throughput University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff - Staff 4, Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 4XW states that this is private land, managed by ParkingEye Ltd, and that it is subject to terms and consitions, including authorisation being required for parking, by which those who park agree to be bound (the contract). 3.ParkingEye's ANPR system captured vehicle xxxxx entering and leaving the site on 22/10/2019, and parking without authorisation. Pursuant to Sch 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, notice has been given to the registered keeper, making them liable for the Parking Charge payable upon breach." As they claim the PCN was issued in October 2019, I do not recall receiving anything in the post. I did receive a Final notice of Debt Recovery from dcbl, demanding £140. However, it had no reference on the letter so I just ignored it. I logged on to ParkingEye's portal to access photographic evidence and did not manage to find the complete PCN, however, there were just two pictures of the car with a time stamp (please see the attached files). I have copied the parking charge details from ParkingEye's website: Parking charge details Parking Charge Reference: xxxxxx Vehicle Registration Number: xxxxxx Contravention date/time: 22/10/2019 19:41:52 Contravention location: University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff - Staff 4 Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 4XW Stay duration: 0 hours 30 minutes Allowed duration: 0 hours 10 minutes Status: Open Outstanding balance: £155.00 (Please allow 24 hours after payment for it to be reflected on the balance) I do not recall parking there, however I may have entered the car on multiple occasions on the day to turn the car around. I visited the car park yesterday to take some pictures (please see the second attached file) I have completed the AOS on moneyclaim.gov.uk I am looking to file my defence based on the following points: The photographic evidence supplied by the claimant does not prove the car parked in the above mentioned car park. It just shows the front and the back of the car with two different time stamps. The notice which states that it is a staff car park is located right at the end of the car park, which is not noticeable as you approach the car park and the board seems fairly new to me, the claimant has not provided any proof to suggest that it was there when the alleged alleged offence took place? As they have allowed a 10 minute grace period, a £70 charge for 20 minutes is unreasonable. Any advice would be much appreciated!! Thanks a lot. Parking Eye 2-converted.pdf 20210725_232345-converted_compressed.pdf
Latest
Our Picks
Reclaim the right Ltd
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS
The Consumer Action Group
×
- Create New...
IPS spam blocked by CleanTalk.