UKCPM/Gladstones Claim form - PCN

[sean797]

Name of the Claimant: UK Car Park Management Limited

claimants Solicitors: Gladstones Solicitors Limited

 

Date of issue: 15/9/2017

 

What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim?

The driver of the vehicle registration

(the 'Vehicle'_ incurred the parking

charge(s) on 16/06/2016 for breaching the

terms of parking on the land at

.

 

The Defendant was driving the Vehicle and/or

is the Keeper of the Vehicle.

AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS

£160 for Parking Charges / Damages and

indemnity costs if applicable, together with

intrest of £14.99 pursuant to s69 of the

County Courts Act 1984 at 8% pa, continuing

to Judgment at £0.04 per day.

What is the value of the claim? £249.99

 

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 ? I don't believe they have sold the 'debt'.

 

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? No - what is this?

 

 

https://imgur.com/a/iaRou contains an image of the sign and the first letter they sent me. Let me know if you need anything else, thanks!

My defense I have written up so far:

 

I dispute the claim for the following reasons:

 

 

The signs aren't clearly positioned therefor not allowing for

anyone to enter into a contract with the parking company. I have

photos shows excessive tree growth over the signs.

 

 

The Parking Charge Notice I received from the claimant

arrived over '14 days beginning with the day after that on which

the specified period of parking ended.' as per the SCHEDULE 4,

Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. I have the original letter with

the date I received it written on.

 

Incident date: 06/06/2016

Issued data(on the PCN): 16/06/2016

I received the letter by post: 23/6/2016

 

This is 16 days starting from the day after the specified period

of parking ended, It should be noted that this was the same time

as the EU referendum, potentially causing slower post due to

postal votes.

 

 

The claimant is claiming £160 (plus interest, fees, costs) the

orginal sign in the parking area says '.. issued with a Parking

Charge of £100' but also says 'Failure to comply with the parking

charge within 28 days may incur additional costs which will be

added to the value of the charge and for which the driver will be

liable on an indemnity basis'. I would like to see the extra £60

which I assume has been added on an indemnity basis. Please can i

see these justified and itemised.

 

 

As per CPR 16.4 (2) (b) (iv) 'the total amount of interest claimed

to the date of calculation; and' No dates relating to the interest

rate calculation is included. If you assume £160 from 16/6/16 at

8% pa this come out at 16.03 (to 15/09/2017) not 14.99 at per

their claim. Although it cannot be £160 starting from 16/6/16 as

the extra £60 appears to have been added on an indemnity basis at

later dates.

 

 

As per CPR 16.4 (2) (b) (iii) 'the date to which it is calculated,

which must not be later than the date on which the claim form is

issued;' This has not been included in the particulars of the

claim.

 

 

As per CPR 16.4 (1) © 'if the claimant is seeking aggravated

damages(GL) or exemplary damages(GL), a statement to that effect

and his grounds for claiming them;' They appear to have added an

extra £60 to the claim without showing any grounds for this.

[mariner51]

Your question is ??

[dx100uk]

please post the images up to PDF

read upload

[dx100uk]

have you acknowledged the claim [AOS} on MCOL website

and sent CPR 31:14?

[ericsbrother]

if you are picking their claim apart they can only claim the parking contract charge so £100.

They add the rest on to make a few quid for Gladstones themselves.

It is not part of any contract and if you read the POFA is unlawful.

It is also unlawful under the consumer rights regs but they do it becasue most people dont defend or dont pick up on this point when they do.

 

Tell us all about the event, as it is an IPC parking co the NTK wont be POFA compliant so they will be suing you in the wrong capacity anyway.

their particulars of claim sidestep this point by saying you were the keeper/driver at the time,

they are supposed to say exactly in what capacity they have a cause for action aganst you.

If this wasnt the case they could sue your next door neighbour and just say that it is close enough

 

Acknowledge the claim first and you then have another fortnight to put together your skeleton defence.

 

 

Generally this starts by using their stick to beat them with

so picking holes in the claim for its inaccuracy and vagueness

followed by denying you are the person who is liable

and then go into the substance of the claim itself.

 

 

At this stage just bullet points like

"no keeper liability has been created so no cause for action against the defendant"

will cover an awful lot and you provide the detail should the matter get close to a hearing

Edited September 22, 2017 by honeybee13
Paras