Do I defend myself in person at Civil National Business Centre, against parking fine

[mayj65]

I've been disputing a Parking Charge Notice, with Direct Collection Bailiffs Ltd since October 2022, with regular correspondence back and forth. I now have a court claim against me in the Civil National Business Centre, Northampton. I have submitted an online acknowledgement of Service and have a couple of days to submit my defence.

Two Questions

1. Do the courts consider the claim and my online defence statement, and then notify both parties of their judgement or will we have to go to court and therefore need legal representation?
2. Is my defence below enough to win the case - It seems cut and dried to me, there are regulations in place which MET did not comply to, thus making the parking charge unenforceable - no??

THE CLAIM....
My car parked at Southgate Park, Stansted and did not pay anything. The driver and occupants walked out of the parking area, in the direction of McDonalds, which contravened the T & C's (on the signs)
The driver agreed to pay within 28 days but did not.

The parking contravention took place on 6th July 2018. MET Parking Services chased me for payment for a while, which I consistently disputed as per the below, then I heard nothing for years, until October 2022 when I was contacted by DCBL.

At no point have I admitted to MET Parking Services or DCBL to being the driver at the time.

MY DEFENCE.....
When the parking contravention occurred the law was such that the registered keeper did not have to identify the driver.

By failing to notify me as keeper within 14 days of the contravention, MET parking did not comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 - Recovery of Unpaid Parking Charges, Section 9 (4) of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

At no time have I ever agreed (other than by default possibly), to pay the charge


The parking signage at the time did not make it at all clear that leaving Southgate Park was not allowed (I'm aware that I am one of many, many drivers caught out in this way, on this site).
I have never mentioned this in my defence because
A. I have never admitted to being the driver, and so how would I know what the signs said, and B. I have no photographic proof of the signs at the time.

MET have sent me photographs of my car entering the carpark and the occupants leaving Southgate Park and returning within about 35 minutes - although there is no proof of where they went to.

MET also sent me images of the parking area showing where the signs are erected (photos date stamped 23.9.2016, nearly 2 years before the event), but you can't read the wording of those signs.
They also sent me close ups images of a number of signs which do say that car drivers must not leave the Southgate Park but these are not date stamped and so could have been taken of new signage, erected long after the event.

Anyway, the signage details are immaterial because I have never admitted to being the driver.
My defence is purely METs failure to comply with the Notice to Keeper regulations at the time (Protection of Freedoms Act 2012)

Look forward to receiving your answers to my 2 questions above and your opinions on the strength of my case - I ONLY HAVE A COUPLE OF DAYS TO SUBMIT MY DEFENCE OF PAY UP.

Thank you

[jamesjg1]

Yes .. you prefix his name with "@" thus " des8 " and to avoid confusion you start your own thread!

Many Thanks.

[des8]

Yes .. you prefix his name with "@" thus " des8 " and to avoid confusion you start your own thread!

[jamesjg1]

Hi, I am another victim of the MET Parking services operation at Stanstead. Is there a way to send a message/request to des8?

[des8]

If you go to court, and assuming you are being sued as the keeper and lose, at that point you need to remind the judge that the claimant can only recover that portion of the charge which remains unpaid.

Generally this is only £100, not the £170 on the claim form.

This is as per PoFA2012 Schedule 4 sec9 (2) (f) :
(f)warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given—

(i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and

(ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver,

the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid;

[mayj65]

And good luck to you too. I have a few days left to decide whether to give in or go to court

[jamesjg1]

Hi, I've just received a claim from MET Parking Services (very similar to the above). The sense I get is the Southgate Park, Stanstead services site has been set up in order to confuse & entrap drivers. I hope to have my day in court with this lot. I understand it's a lottery, but I will be doing my level best to get TV/Radio/Newspapers on board. All the best of luck MAYj65 & all.

[mayj65]

Hi,

Attached is the full claim particulars.

Thank you for all your advice and guidance, and for the template

[des8]

You say they are now taking the unpaid notices to court for money, that makes me nervous as it follows that they are winning the cases!!!

they win some lose some.
For them it is a numbers game, and county court is a bit of a lottery anyway

[des8]

Should I tell DCBL now, that their signage images and site plan make no sense or reveal that in court ??

No, you will detail the inadequacy of the signage in your witness statement.

Here's a template defence you can use to write your own defence if you want bearing in mind we have only seen edited parts of the claim)

1.The Defendant received the claim xxx from the CCBC on xxx

2.Each and every allegation in the Claimants statement of case is denied unless specifically admitted in this Defence.

3.This claim appears to be a parking charge following a breach of contract

4.It is admitted that the Defendant is the registered keeper of Vehicle xxxx is reg

5.The Claimants statement of case fails to give adequate information to enable the Defendant to properly assess The Defendant's position with regards the claim.

6.. The Claimant's Particulars of Claim are unclear on whether the Defendant was the driver or was the keeper of the vehicle at the time of the alleged incident.

7.The Defendant respectfully requests the court orders the Claimant provide the necessary documentation in order for The Defendant to fully plead his case else the Claim should stand struck out.

8.in the event that the relevant documents are received from the Claimant, the Defendant will then be in a position to amend his defence, and would ask that the Claimants bear the costs of the amendment.

9.It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief as claimed or at all.

Statement of Truth

I believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

[mayj65]

You say they are now taking the unpaid notices to court for money, that makes me nervous as it follows that they are winning the cases!!!

[des8]

Yes, I had seen that article.
I have recently read somewhere that back in 2018/19 when this issue was quite widely publicised, almost none of these parking tickets were taken to court, but that recently MET's debt collectors have started to follow through with court action - I wonder why??? For money

I thought I'd also read that the ruling that the keeper does not have to reveal the driver no longer stands and they must now declare the driver's details
Do you know if this is true ??? Maybe I imagined it or read it on a parking company site. Anyway there is no legal requirement to identify the driver !!!

Responses in red

[mayj65]

Should I tell DCBL now, that their signage images and site plan make no sense or reveal that in court ??

[mayj65]

Yes, I had seen that article.
I have recently read somewhere that back in 2018/19 when this issue was quite widely publicised, almost none of these parking tickets were taken to court, but that recently MET's debt collectors have started to follow through with court action - I wonder why???

I thought I'd also read that the ruling that the keeper does not have to reveal the driver no longer stands and they must now declare the driver's details
Do you know if this is true ??? Maybe I imagined it !!!

[des8]

It might be helpful to see the FULL EXACT wording of the particulars of claim.

However 1) should suffice
2) has no chance as the 28 days is part of the contractual terms agreed by driver even if not realised
3)As the keeper you could go to the Park to check the signage

Have you seen this article?https://www.theguardian.com/money/20...southgate-park
No use in your defence but interesting