UKPCLtd/DCB legal ANPR PCN claimform - McDonalds Baguley 1062 673 Altrincham Road, Wythenshawe M23 9AA.

[Nicky Boy]

The sign is totally prohibitive...

 

"Private Property - No Unauthorised Parking"

 

With no indication of how to become "authorised".

 

And further down... "for the use of McDonald's customers", but still with no instructions on how to become "authorised".

 

[brassnecked]

Think the Authorisation is implied by the fir use of macDonalds customer's, however how do they know if someone goes off site, if not an attendant and is CCTV that's a whole other GDPR can of worms they have opened for themselves.

[lookinforinfo]

Are there any other signs that are different from the one you posted. And is there one at the entrance to McDonalds that you could show.

 

Wonder why they didn't answer all the questions asked in the CPR. Perhaps they do not have them all when they should.

[prestton]

There are three pictures sent by the solicitor of the same signage at various points in the car park. Can’t confirm if there is specifically one at the entrance. Is that a huge deal if they are prominent in the car park? 
 

Based on what the solicitor has said does the proposed defence need amending? Has to be submitted this week. 

[dx100uk]

no you file the std defence, dont play any of your cards giving things away.

 

dx

[prestton]

Understood. 

[lookinforinfo]

The driver has to be made aware before entering the car park that it is private land and terms and conditions are to be observed. The sign should include who the ATA is so yes the Entrance sign is important.

 

BPA Code of Practice

"19.2 Entrance signs play an important part in establishing a parking contract and deterring trespassers. Therefore, as well as the signs you must have telling drivers about the terms and conditions for parking, you must also have a standard form of entrance sign at the entrance to the parking area.

 

Entrance signs must tell drivers that the car park is managed and that there are terms and conditions they must be aware of. Entrance signs must follow some minimum general principles and be in a standard format.

 

The size of the sign must take into account the expected speed of vehicles approaching the car park, and it is recommended that you follow Department for Transport guidance on this. See Appendix B for an example of an entrance sign and more information about their use. A standard form of entrance sign must be placed at the entrance to the parking area.

 

There may be reasons why this is impractical, for example: • when there is no clearly defined car park entrance • when the car park is very small • at forecourts in front of shops and petrol filling stations • at parking areas where general parking is not permitted"

 

AND

"19.7 You should display the BPA’s AOS logos at all sites. This will help the public to see that you are a legitimate operator, and show that the site is run properly".  

 

No sniggering at the back.

[prestton]

Ok, all clear. Next step is to submit the defence tomorrow and then take it from there 

[dx100uk]

defence to file is further down in the Q&A sticky you filled out 

don't file early mind..

[prestton]

Defence proposed below will be submitted tomorrow (33 days will be up this weekend).

 

The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature and fails to disclose any offence and 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.  The Defendant is the recorded keeper of [XXXXXXX].

 

2.  It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant.

 

3.  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 car park is owned by the landowner and the terms of entry are set by the landowner.  Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 

 

4.  In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant.

 

5.  The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 

 

6.  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.

[FTMDave]

[prestton]

Defence submitted today

[prestton]

Ok,

we’ve received a letter now stating after reviewing defence they intend to proceed with the claim.

 

They also in the letter state their client maybe prepared to settle and to call within 7 days to discuss.

 

They’ve also sent their completed directions questionnaire saying they’re willing to mediation and they’d like it to be at their claimants home court. 
 

Thoughts?

 

Bear in mind my brother probably won’t fancy attending a court hearing 

[dx100uk]

std letter everyone gets if you go read a few pcn claimform threads 

doesnt mean they are going to send it to the court and progress the claim.

 

go look at the claim status on mcol

 

i bet it says nothing about the court sending DQ's out yet.

 

dx

[prestton]

Ok, so on mcol nothing has changed since defence submitted on 1/12/22. Does this mean that as 28 days have passed that the claim should now be stayed? 
 

Assume then advice is to do nothing yet? 

Edited January 4, 2023 by prestton

[dx100uk]

we know there are huge delays at northants bulk, always is this time of year.

 

give it a week or two.

keep an eye on mcol for dq sent to claimant .....date

dq sent to defendant ..date.

[prestton]

Ok, will do. I take it advice for now is sit tight? Not worth a settlement conversation?

[brassnecked]

Their idea of a settlement is a tenner off the claim if that probably.

[FTMDave]

1 hour ago, prestton said:

Bear in mind my brother probably won’t fancy attending a court hearing 

To be blunt - tough.

 

If he didn't fancy court then he should have paid the fleecers their £50 in September 2021.

 

He needs to concentrate on winning the court case.

[prestton]

Thanks for that. He’s not very well and it’s easier said than done talking about appearing in court for some people. 

[FTMDave]

Point taken.

 

But this is civil court, not criminal.  None of the intimidating figures in wigs.  More like a job interview with a person in a suit (the judge) asking both parties to state their case and then making a decision.

 

It just seems bizarre that the fleecers have given him the chance to make this go away when it was £50 then £100 then £160 - and now the figure is £270 he suddenly wants to negotiate with them.

 

I recently had to work out CAG court victories over the last two and a bit years with one of the PPCs, and it was over 80%.  So he has an 80%+ chance of winning in court if he prepares his case properly.

 

Alternatively he can negotiate with the fleecers, presumably they'd drop the interest part (also because the judge would never allow most of it) so that'd £25 off so £245 at a guestimate.

 

His call.

[prestton]

I’ve been to civil court in the past with debt collectors so it doesn’t phase me. But he’s not the same.

 

I’ve advised him to hang fire for now.

 

It was just a question on whether it was worth it?

I didn’t think it would be but felt worth asking, I’ve advised ignoring it all until the claim was received.

 

We’ve done everything so far advised (procedure took me back 10 years to debt collector times) , AoS, defence at the appropriate time etc but still not gone away yet.

 

Will see what transpires next 

[prestton]

Ok, so DQ now received from the court. I assume the answers are as follows 

 

A. Yes to mediation 

B. Complete contact details

C. Yes to small claims track

D. ? to Determination without a hearing (not sure on this one) 

E1. Local court

E2. No to written evidence 

E3. No to witnesses 

E4. Complete dates not available 

E5. Nobody vulnerable. 
 

Copy to court and claimants solicitor 
 

Advice gratefully received 

Edited January 18, 2023 by prestton

[dx100uk]

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/347310-legal-n180-directions-questionnaire-small-claims-track-correct-at-sept-2016/#comment-5088148

3 copies

yes to mediation (unless you filed our Statute Barred Defence OR this is a claim for a Private Parking Ticket)

1 wit you

Suitability for determination without a hearing? no (read all the posts in N180 link above for the reason)

the rest is obv

1 to the court

1 to sols (omit phone/sig/email)

1 for your file

 

dx

[prestton]

It is for a private parking ticket so what is the reason for saying no to mediation in that specific case, might the court look upon that badly?

Similarly in Andy’s note it mentions saying no to suitability for determination if you have witnesses etc to dispute factual matters but I’m not sure that applies here?

 

Might it be easier for my brother (who’s not too well) and might find even civil court intimidating to present the arguments remotely?