Highview/DCB(L) ANPR PCN - Letter of Claim - Now Claimform - overstay - Riverside Retail Park in Norwich, Norfolk.

[anotheruser0000]

Hi Dave,

I must admit I didn't end up sending a letter to the retail park but that's OK, I'm not bothered about getting it cancelled,

I really don't mind my day in court, I've been busy reading up on various acts and other sources, some fascinating stuff,

I'm not going to mention anything here at the moment in case they have spies but I think they may be doing something that doesn't comply with the relevant laws and/or guidelines at Riverside,

I don't want to give them any ammo or chance to rectify their mistakes.

I must also say that after spending time reading here I have great admiration for all the forum helpers who help everyone with their incredible knowledge on these legal matters.

Thank you to all of you.

I will post up my redacted Claim Form shortly.

[dx100uk]

too late now to bother hiding stuff and it doesnt matter if they read here at all. cant hurt you.

please dont play secret squirrel

it always ends up in tears as OP's rely on stuff that has little or no real bearing to the judge.

dx

[dx100uk]

thread title updated

[anotheruser0000]

Hi dx,

I didn't want to mention yet until I read further and did some investigation.

here is my redacted claim form.

Will the other info Dave mentioned still be required?

 

Thanks

Redacted Claim Form 2.pdf

[dx100uk]

yes please complete the sticky Q&A so we dont have to keep opening a PDF to find answers to important questions CAG members need to guide you.

keeping things on thread might stop you having to bother researching as its all been done before 100's of times here.

dx

[anotheruser0000]

Ah OK, I will work through it and get it posted up shortly.

I read somewhere else that these PPC's can get things done retrospectively and manage to thwart a defense by doing so, that was all.

 

Cheers.

[lookinforinfo]

The Land owners are Nuveen Real Estate , a large American property investment company.

The UK director is  [email protected] and his surname is Sales he s not the Sales director.

You will have to specify the car park as he has probably never heard of Norwich [or Knarritch as the local call it].

[dx100uk]

nope. shows where you've been reading up then...though so

cag does not recommend filling any defence that plays any of your cards

thats not till WS stage if it ever goes that far.

when you've done the sticky, scroll down on it further and you'll see the defence section.

dx

[anotheruser0000]

Yes, I read that, that's what prompted me to think of not mentioning it here yet.

This is what I was referring to earlier, seems credible, if anyone was interested: (although I don't want to stray of topic )

At the final hearing in 2016 at the Bolton County Court we relied, you might think unwisely, on a defence that the signage was illegal. 

ParkingEye’s Claims Handler, David Greenbank, although not attending the hearing, had submitted a Skeleton Argument containing a claim that they had been granted planning permission for the signs retrospectively.

The judge found in favour of ParkingEye and anyway we had run out of time and he was anxious to move on to the next case (back-to-back parking cases). 

We had evidence to prove our case, but weren’t allowed to present it.

Parking Prankster: The great private car park planning approval scam (parking-prankster.blogspot.com)

 

 

[lookinforinfo]

Well done for boning up on Schedule 4 .

I expect you understand the point I was making about not inviting the keeper to pay the charge.

At the start of Section 9 the wording includes the word "must" which is a very important word legally.

It means that Highview have to include all the requirements stated in that section or subsection. If it's missed out the PCN does not comply with the Act and the keeper cannot be held liable to pay.

You have to make allowances for them .

The Act has only been in force since 2012 so it will take them a few more years yet before they get it right.

But it does emphasise the comprehension level of who you are dealing with.

Their solicitors are a tad below that level so most of your snotty letter will doubtless go over their heads.

But the Judge will appreciate the humour. if it gets that far. Probably the irony too of the solicitor getting some legal information that they are unaware of.

[anotheruser0000]

Which Court have you received the claim from ? CIVIL NATIONAL BUSINESS CENTRE

Name of the Claimant ?  HIGHVIEW PARKING LIMITED

How many defendant's Joint or Self? SELF

Date of issue –  11 APR 2024

 

Particulars of Claim
 

1. The Defendant (D) is indebted to the Claimant (C) for a parking charge(s) issued to vehicle xxxx xxx at Riverside Retail Park A.

2. The PCN(S) were issued on 08/08/2023

3. The defendant is pursued as the driver of the vehicle for breach of the terms on the signs (the contract). Reason: Vehicle Remained On Private Property in Breach Of The Prominently displayed Terms And Conditions.

4. In the alternative the defendant is pursued as the keeper pursuant to POFA 2012, Schedule 4.

   AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS

1. £140 being the total of the PCN(s) and damages.

2. Interest at a rate of 8% per annum pursuant to s.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 from the date hereof at a daily rate of £.02 until judgement or sooner payment.

3. Costs and court fees

What is the total value of the claim?  £231.51

Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ?  Letter of Claim dated 12 Feb 2024

Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred?  NO

....................

Lol!

Yes, lookinforinfo,  I picked up on the word "Must" ....

As you say, they have not done what they legally "Must" do

I'm going to buy the Dummies Guide to Law and see if DCB(L) will give me a job

I'm also looking forward to CPR 27.1(1)(b)  

Edited April 15 by anotheruser0000

[lookinforinfo]

I wouldn't bother reading the Dummies book you are already overqualified to work there. And you have now gone over their heads again quoting CPR. As far as they know that is to do with resuscitation.

They  still don't know that the PCN is non compliant!!

Edited April 15 by lookinforinfo

[anotheruser0000]

They'll need CPR when they see my CPR claim!  

 

[FTMDave]

So you need to get AOS done and a CPR request sent.

[anotheruser0000]

Hi Dave,

Yep ....

Will have to do AOS tomorrow ....

Are you referring to CPR 31.14 Request?

[jk2054]

yes he is.

You want to get that done as quick as possible so in any case their deadline to respond is before your defence filing deadline

Edited April 16 by jk2054

[anotheruser0000]

Ah, OK .... was just making sure he wasn't referring to my  unreasonable Outrageous costs order under CPR 27.1(1)(b).

 

OK, both will be done and posted/submitted tomorrow.

 

[AndyOrch]

12 minutes ago, anotheruser0000 said:

CPR 27.1(1)(b)

[anotheruser0000]

Hehe ....

Alliance/ Letter of Claim - appealed - Promenade Car Park Perranporth - Private Land Parking Enforcement - Consumer Action Group

AoS   -   Submitted and Confirmed

CPR 31.14   -   Will be done and in the post before the end of the day today.

Thanks All.

[anotheruser0000]

CPR 31.14 drafted,

a question though, why is there a copyright? symbol next to CPR 31.15?

In accordance with CPR 31.15© I undertake to be responsible for your reasonable copying costs incurred in complying with this CPR 31.14 request.

Also, can I add ANPR CCTV cameras to point 2. T&C Planning 2007 or will etc suffice?

I have decided that I'm also going to make a complaint to the Land Owner,

thanks  lookinforinfo for land owner details.

 

.

[dx100uk]

typo just remove it

dont expect them to comply and dont wait for them to do so.

file our bland defence on time on mcol regardless

dx

[anotheruser0000]

OK, thanks, I won't wait for them.

On a side note, some of the posts on here are a bit frustrating, I read through five pages or so of someone going through the court process rooting for them as I'm reading, then nothing, not heard of again.

Left here wondering what the outcome was, lol!

[dx100uk]

yep sadly thats how people treat us after giving free advise...

 

[anotheruser0000]

OMG! I Know! .... someone here with a chance to sue Highview for breach of GDPR with a very good chance of winning, I was excited reading it especially after all the work put in by site members and thinking he could hammer them for £££'s and then, the OP disappeared half way through.

Although you never know the reason so all I can say is I hope the OP is alive and well regardless.

I'd relish the chance to do them for that if they breached my GDPR.

[anotheruser0000]

Hi All,

I know we are supposed to file the standard defence but I was thinking of adding the following to see if it would deter DCBL from continuing as this point I believe is irrefutable?

7. In any case, the alleged period of overstay falls within the consideration and grace periods outlined in government legislation and the governing body code of practice and therefore cannot be considered to be in breach of any terms and conditions set forth by the claimant.

What do you think?