Brittania/BW Claimform - 3xPCNs - sth Esx college Lukers rd Southend ss11nd

[ericsbrother]

so where was he supposed to have parked in a manner that is the cause of this action?

 

Knowing exactly where this was allows us to have a look at the site on google and also offer advice on the likelihood of Britannia having a valid contract with the landownr and be able to offer parking contracts to the public. For example, on a residential development it is rare for the parking co to ahve the correct authority and even rarer for them to get their signage right.

 

Now Southend College is still to vague if there are multiple car parks or if he parked in a place that wanst a car park

Edited December 15, 2018 by honeybee13
Paras

[ericsbrother]

From what I can read on the sign on the left there isnt a contract offered at entry and the sign is an invitation to treat.

This menas that the terms offered by other signage elsewhere isnt binding as you can take it or leave it but the parking is allowed without acceptance of the further offer.

 

Common explanation of this is a shop has a sign outside saying 50% off most items so you go inside and look at a pair of trousers and ask the price to be told they are not included in the sale. The sign outside is an invitation to treat, it invites you to make further enquiries and then enter negotiations regarding the items of interest. it doesnt force the shopkeeper to sell you those trousers at 50% off nor does it force you to buy them just becuse you went into the shop to see what was on offer. the shopkeeper cant sue you for not buying the trousers or make demands that you pay for his heat and light and this is in effect what the parking co is doing.

 

As it appears to be a P&D the terms are those on the machine and only accepted when you put the money in .

Any sign around the car aprk that is different to the machine conditions are meaningless when it comes to offer and consideration

 

so my approach would be for your son to respond to the PAP letter and state that " there was no contract formed between myself and your client and in any case the signage at the entrance is merely an invitation to treat, not an offer of terms so nothing to accept. Any claim will be vigourously defended as being vex".

 

Now that might not make them drop the matter but it does create a paper trail and buys a bit of time to get some pictures of the signage at the site plus any paymant machinery taken and posted here plus time to look for any paperwork and post that up here as well so we can rubbish that if possible.

They will also know that their costs on pursuing this will rise and it wont be a walkover so hw might just get the result desired, ie they go back under their stone.

 

I have written the short response in a way that doesnt state who was driving, your son may have a lot more leverage on that if they havent got their paperwork right so no "I" or "we" or "they", use the third person impersonal , so "the driver" if you need to say anything about the events later

Edited December 16, 2018 by dx100uk
space/spell

[ericsbrother]

I would have written something different if I wanted to say something different. I put it in quotes to make it easy to understand what part to actually write so send that short letter pronto. Copy to parking co as well so they know that they will be spending money on a gamble rather than a certainty

[ericsbrother]

so for the moment you acknowledge the claim and tick the box saying defend all. You can do this online by opening an account at moneyclaim and follow the instructions.

 

Once this has been done you have a further fortnight to submit an outline defence. This can be quite simple so somehting like " no contract was offered by the claimant to the defendant at the time so there is no breach of contract and thus no cause for action"

 

now when it have got as far as the court date being set you will have to flesh this out but you can also rubbish their Particulars of claim, the failure to follow the civil procedure rules and add a load of other stuff that applies as well. It is usual for the solicitors like BWL and Gladdys to then pull the plug on their clients because they know the chances of winning are very small.

Edited February 16, 2019 by honeybee13
Paras, typos

[ericsbrother]

we need some decent pictures of the entrance to the land from the public highway, pictures of any signs there and also of the signage in the place the car was parked. Get them done now so you arent left chasing thsi up whe it becomes critical.

we also need to see the original NTK's so if your son binned these the at least tell us if they were received at the time. the cahnces of them being POFA compliant is slim but it would ahve been better to be able to read one to offer comment. Look for other Britannia parking threads and see if they have one posted up and if so let us know

Edited February 18, 2019 by ericsbrother

[ericsbrother]

this form is easy- no to mediation and yes to small claims. That limits both parties costs.

you DO want to go to court becasue they dont want to, they have used this just to coerce you into paying them money the arent owed.

Now after this they will send you a letter saying that small claims is appropriate and that the matter has been allocated to your local county court (unless you specified a different court on this N180 form)

The parking co will then kick themselves because they will have to either drop the claim or pay another £25 hearing fee and then risk not only chucking away the £100 they have already spent on getting this far but losing a larger amount in costs for the day when they lose.

 

now so I dont have to go back over this thread did you contact the DVLA and enquire who accessed your keeper detaisl, when and why? they need to have made a search for each charge because they cannot assume that just because you were the keeper one day that you were also the keeper for the other events, even if they were the next day. One of the parking co's managing a railway car park got slaughtered some years back for (unlawfully) seizing a car that they thought belonged to a person who kept abusing the car park and it cost them thousands just because they hadnt done an up to date ownership check.

So in your case if they didnt check the keeper details it may be possible you transferred the ownership to another person after the first ticket and took back ownership between then and now. Not a common occurrence but could happen with a taxi lease for example.