Advice on Filing a Defence for Parking Fine Claim

[Silver Paw]

Hello all,
I recently received a Money Claim Form from ELMS Legal regarding a parking fine from August 2024. I did not pay the fine at the time and now I’ve received this claim form. I want to file a defence on any basis that could help me defend this claim.


I would be grateful to the members of the forum for all the help they could offer me to help me take the correct steps to draw up and file the written defence ? Any guidance on how to structure my defence would be greatly appreciated. I have acknowledged the claim online using the advised provided in this forum. So I think I have 28 days form 23^rd of May 25. Thus I only have a few days to respond to the claim.


They must have got my details from the licence plate supplied by the DVLA. I guess DVLA make money from passing on the register keeper details to these firms.

The claim I received a claim form for £245 that states:

The claim is for a breach of contract breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. The defendant's vehicle X was identified in the X location on DATE in breach of the advertised terms and conditions. namely not parked wholly within the markings of the designated bay. At all times the defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. The terms and conditions upon entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the failure to comply, namely a parking charge notice will be issued and the defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.

What are my options here please? The fine is quite substantial and would be a solid chunk out of my pay, on the other hand I don't want a CCJ on my record as I have a mortgage.

I first received the notice to keeper in early September 2024 then a final reminder in October 2024 ( no second reminder in-between) followed by letter before action from ELMS Legal around 15^th May 2025. I did not respond to any of them.

Then on 29^th May 2025 I received the court claim form for £245.00. I have responded to this by acknowledging it the next day.

I have been visiting this car park for over 20 years ,never notices any signs or thought that I am entering into a contact with the company when I park my car there until I received the notice to keeper. I was not able to park my car fully in the bay because there was another car partly parked in the bay. I did not purposely park the car outside the lines. I simply used the car parked in the bay as a guide when parking my car. I would have been able to park wholly with in the bay if that car was not partly in the bay my car was parked. Plus I was only there for about half an hour or maybe less. It would cause my joints and shoulder too much aggravation to take the car out and park it in a different bay.

I was suffering from lot of pain in my right shoulder (Adhesive Capsulitis) plus also pain in other joints plus inflammatory marks in my blood test results pointing to Rheumatoid arthritis and Scleroderma (I have doctor’s letters to support this issue as the doctor had to refer me to hospital for further investigation). I did not feel that I had enough energy in me to deal with it. Which was part of the reason for not responding to the notice to keeper and final reminder. I am also wondering if I can use my medical condition as part of the defence along with any other suggestions that you can make.


I feel that these companies look at drivers like cash cows and use any excuse to extort money. It is not possible to open the passenger door properly as the bays do not have void spaces between them allowing sufficient space for the doors to be opened. I only found this void spaces in the local Sainsbury car park.
I also feel the signage is inadequate as never noticed the sign at the entrance to the car park mentioned in the particulars of claim, my other half also said he never noticed the signage and he is been visiting the carpark for many years. The parking bays in the car park can only be accessed after turning in to carpark access and passing a roundabout. The sign mentioned in the particulars of claim is positioned few meters inside just before the roundabout. Thus in my opinion the sign is not at the entrance and it is inadequately placed in a busy area just before a roundabout where a driver will not notice as the driver will be looking out for cars emerging from the right of the roundabout or even if the driver noticed the signage s/he is not in a position to stop and read the sign (terms of the contract). The rest of the signs are in located in the centre of the car park which will be visible to the drivers parking facing the sign. Drivers who park in the bays adjacent to the main road facing the main road will not see the signage unless they walk up to the sign in the middle of the car park. Not sure if this is explanation helps. I can provide a simple diagram if the members of the forum think that this is something I should incorporate in my response.


Please could you advise if I should send a letter for subject access request letter? It says they have a month to provide this. However I needs to submit a defence before that if the court deadline is 28 days.

Please could you also let me know if I should send a CPR 31.14 request for inspection of documents?

I am wondering if I have to pay them for this as the template make reference to paying reasonable coping cost incurred in complying with CPR 31.14. I am not sure what is considered as reasonable cost. I hope that someone on this forum would have experience of this or this wording is just formality and I do not have to pay them for the copy paperwork.


I would like to upload PDF of redacted paperwork and picture of sign but this forum's system is not letting me do this. A message is coming up saying "you are not authorized to create or remove attachments (no_create_permission_attach).

Could someone please let me know how I can get permission to attached PDF and picture? I cannot upload any links either. I am not sure what the issue is.

Many thanks you all in advance

[des8]

You should send a CPR31.14 request to the solicitors who filed the claim, and a SAR to the parking company. (templates for these are available in the SHORTCUTS panel on right of this page)
Make sure you do not identify the driver, and do not send any money with these requests.

to allow us to view the paperwork you could use a hosting site such as IMGUR, and post a ink here
When that is available we will better be able to advise you of your options

[Silver Paw]

Thank you for the quick reply.

I have taken pictures of the documents and put them on IMGUR.

I hope the links here works.

If you think the doctor's letter would help I can upload them also. Let me know.

Many thanks

[Silver Paw]

https://imgur.com/a/f1DQ8da

[des8]

Had a quick look and this is a standard template claim and a NTK which does not comply with legal requirements to transfer liabiity for unpaid charges from driver to keeper.

I'll draft up a defence for you to use/amend/discard over the weekend

[Silver Paw]

Thanks for the quick reply again and thank you for drafting the defence ,

If you have time please could you please explain what are the legal requirements for transfer liability for unpaid charges from driver to keeper. trying to understand how does one distinguish between the driver and the keeper? Thank you

[Silver Paw]

Hello all,

Below is the CPR 31.14 that I have composed to be sent to ELMS Legal Ltd

I have not included a date for filing my defence as stated in the template as I am not sure what this date . Also I am not sure if there is anything else that I should ask except the contract or the terms and conditions.

I hope this is good enough to be sent via recorded post later today. If it is not then please let me know the amendments that I needs to make.

Many Thanks



Name
Address
Postcode
Phone
Date

ELMS LEGAL LIMITED
31 Handley Street
Sleaford
Linconshire
NG34 7TQ



Dear Sirs/ madam,

Claim Number: XXXXXXX


Request for documents mentioned in a statement of case under CPR 31.14


On 30/05/2025 I received a County Court claim from yourselves of which I have acknowledged receipt indicating my intention to defend in full.



To enable me to file my defence and/or counterclaim, I require inspection of documents you mention in your statement of claim ahead of filing my defence.


1. Contract / the terms and conditions



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

You should note that this claim has not yet been allocated to a specific track and the provisions of CPR 27(2) are of no effect. Had your claim not been issued through CCBC the Claimant would have been obliged to attach copies of the documentation upon which it relies to the Particulars of Claim.

I, as Defendant, am entitled to see the documents on which the Claimant relies and which you must produce at trial. Disclosure at this stage will enable me to fully plead my case and further the Overriding Objective.

You should ensure compliance with your CPR 31 duties and ensure that the document(s) I have requested are copied to and received by me within 7 days of receiving this letter.

If you require more time in which to comply with this request you must tell me in writing and confirm your agreement to an extension of the time allowed for me to file my defence as allowed under CPR 15.5 so I may notify the court.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely

Signature

[des8]

In your CPR you should also request a copy of the contract between parking operator and land occupier. That contract is the one that gives the operator authority to manage the car park.

Re transfer of liability of driver to keeper for unpaid charges:
When parking on private and the driver enters into a contract with the and occupier or a parking company.
The principle of privity of contract that if a contract is entered into between two parties, only those two parties can enforce the terms of the contract or be held liable for breaching it.
However because it is difficult for the parking company to identify the driver the law was changed by the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) to allow transfer of the liability for those unpaid charges to the keeper.
However to do that successfully the parking company has to comply with certain conditions set out in Schedule 4 of PoFA
It is at that point they often make errors which should be fateful to their claim (in your case they fail to state the period during which your car was parked)

The keeper of a vehicle is not necessarily the registered keeper, and neither are necessarily the driver at the time of a parking incident

Will post defence later

[des8]

Here is a draft defence for your perusal.
Do not send your defence yet ... if the documentation requested in your CPR is forthcoming you will need to amend some sections
Also I have not been able to read the small print on the parking sign. I have guessed at its terminology, but you need to check it and perhaps amend the suggested wording if you intend to use it

If you use this draft it will have to be filed and served either as an attachment to an email or by post (first class with free certificate of posting from PO .. my preferred method!)
l


INTRODUCTION
Unless otherwise stated in this Defence:
i) the Defendant uses the same terminology as the Claimant has employed in the Particulars of Claim; and
ii) the Defendant denies each and every allegation or that the Claimant is entitled to any relief.

1. This claim has been issued against the Defendant in connection with the Defendant's refusal to pay a private parking charge which the Claimant alleges that the Defendant is liable to pay either as the driver of the vehicle or as the registered keeper. For the reasons set out in this Defence, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the sums claimed or any relief at all.

CLAIMANT'S NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES

1. By way of general comment, it should be noted that whilst the Defendant intends to respond to the issues raised by the Claimant in the Particulars of Claim, he cannot do so with complete accuracy because the Claimant has not pleaded its case in accordance with CPR 16.4(1)(a).. There is not a concise statement of the facts which discloses a cause of action, rather the Claimant has merely provided a series of generalised statements which in turn makes it difficult for the Defendant to respond as he does not know or understand the basis of the Claimant's case. For example, the particulars allege that the Defendant:
   1. is liable as the driver of the vehicle but does not indicate the basis of that allegation
   2. is liable as the registered keeper of the vehicle yet the Claimant has failed to particularise the basis of that allegation.
   3. claims "recovery of the parking charge notice contractual costs and interest" without indicating how the total is computed
2. The Defendant is surprised by the haziness of the particulars given that the Claimant is represented professionally by a solicitor and as such, the lack of compliance with the CPR to formulate proper particulars cannot be excused. The court is invited to consider its general case management powers pursuant to CPR 3.1 to

(i)make an order that unless the Defendant files and serves an amended Particulars of Claim compliant with CPR 16.4(1)(a) within 14 days of said order, then the claim shall be struck out and judgment entered in favour of the Defendant; or
(ii)if the court considers it appropriate, to strike out the claim entirely as on the basis that the claim discloses no reasonable grounds for a cause of action; and
(iii)exercise any other case management powers the court sees fit.

APPLICABLE LAW

1. Section 56 together with Schedule 4 of The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA) provides landowners with powers to manage parking on their land. Paragraph 4 of Schedule 4 of POFA stipulates that the liability for an unpaid parking charge may only be transferred from the driver to the registered keeper of the vehicle if certain conditions as prescribed in Schedule 4 are met.

LIABILITY AS THE DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE

1. The Claimant has failed to provide any supporting evidence that the Defendant was the driver of the vehicle at the relevant time. Accordingly, the Claimant's allegation is entirely baseless and nothing more than a fishing expedition which the Defendant considers to be an abuse of process.
2. Without prejudice to the foregoing paragraph, the Claimant has not provided any evidence establishing that the Claimant has authority to manage the car park or enforce its regulations by way of issuing parking charge notices pursuant to condition 5(1)(a) of POFA 2012.
3. In the absence of evidence that the Defendant was the driver, it is the Defendant's contention, and the court is invited to make an inference, that the Claimant has no lawful basis to pursue the Defendant as the driver of the vehicle.
4. If (which the Defendant denies), the Defendant is found to be liable for the Parking Charge as the driver, the Defendant will say that the Parking Charge is not enforceable on the basis that the terms were contrary to the requirement of good faith which causes a significant imbalance under the contract to the detriment of the Defendant. Consequently, the term is unfair and is not binding on the Defendant pursuant to section 62 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015.(CRA) The Defendant will rely on Section 68 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 which requires that every term of a consumer contract must be transparent and expressed in a plain and intelligible language. The Defendant contends that the term referring to the charges on the signage was neither transparent nor intelligible in that:

(i))the sign refers to ‘charges' but fails to explain what charges the Claimant is seeking to recover. Accordingly, the term described is vague and ambiguous contrary to the guidance published by the Competition and Markets Authority on unfair contract terms.
(ii) In Parking Eye vs Beavis ([2015] UKSC 67. Case ID. UKSC 2015/0116. The S C found the parking charge (£85) was a genuine estimate of the costs of operating the parking scheme including losses suffered by the operator if its terms and conditions were not complied with (see paras 188 and 193 of the judgment).
(iii) In this claim unspecified "contractual costs" (presumably the charges" mentioned on the signs) additional to the parking charge may involve an element of double recovery and is an abuse of process that may taint the entirety of the claim and permit the Court to strike out the claim (CPR3 4 (2) (b))

5, additionally the Defendant has, subsequent to receiving this claim, noted that the signs in the car park are so positioned that a driver could easily not notice them as they are neither well positioned
nor prominent from all parking bays

LIABILITY AS THE REGISTERED KEEPER

1.It is admitted that the Defendant is the registered keeper of the vehicle with registration xx11 abc
2 It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to recover the Parking Charge from the Defendant as registered keeper of the vehicle:
i).The Claimant can only transfer liability for unpaid parking charges from the Driver to the Registered Keeper by complying with conditions mandated in Schedule 4 of the Protection of
Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA)
PoFA Schedule 4 para 9 (2) (a) states "The notice[to keeper} must specify.... the period of parking to which the notice relates"
The Notice to Keeper does not specify a period so liability for any unpaid charge cannot be transferred from the driver to the keeper

ii).Contrary to condition 5(1)(a) of POFA 2012, the Claimant failed to provide evidence that it has the right to enforce against the driver
of the vehicle the requirement to pay the Parking Charge. The Claimant has failed to supply:
(a)a copy of the written contract setting out the Claimant’s authority to enforce and/or pursue the Parking Charge against the driver; and
(b)what (if any) conditions may be attached as regards the recovery of the Parking Charge.

iii).Contrary to PoFA 2012 sch4 condition 5(1)(b), the Claimant knew the identity of the driver prior to the commencement of these
proceedings. In the particulars of claim it is stated "at all material times the Defendant was ..... the driver ”. In light of that allegation, it is
implied that the Claimant has actual knowledge of the driver’s identity and so the Defendant cannot be held liable for the Parking
Charge as the registered keeper, and the Claimant must pursue the driver of the vehicle only. The Defendant will seek to rely on
paragraph 221 of the POFA 2012 Explanatory Notes, which states that:… The creditor is not obliged to pursue unpaid parking charges through this scheme and may seek to do so through other
means but they may not use the scheme provided for here to secure double recovery of unpaid parking charges (paragraph 4(6)), nor will they have the right to pursue the keeper, as opposed to
the driver, of the vehicle where they have sufficient details of the driver’s identity (emphasis added)


Recovery of Claimant’s costs associated with the Parking Charge

1.To the extent that the Claimant seeks to recover the costs incurred in pursuing the Parking Charge, the Defendant denies that such sums are recoverable for the following reasons:
(i)The costs sought by the Claimant are based upon a contractual right under the terms of the parking contract. It is well established
under the doctrine of privity that a person who is not party to the contract cannot sue or be sued. Any contractual relationship in
respect of the parking and the alleged contravention was solely between the Claimant and the driver of the vehicle, not the
registered keeper; and
(ii)also paragraph 4(5) of POFA provides that the maximum amount which may be recovered from the registered keeper is the total
amount of the unpaid parking charges specified in the notice to the registered keeper. The unpaid parking charges specified in the
notice were £100.

It follows that any liability owed by the keeper to the Claimant is several to the driver’s liability and is limited to an amount that does not exceed the unpaid parking charges. The Claimant’s pursuit of these contractual costs is not recoverable and amounts to an abuse of process.


CONCLUSION

For the reasons as set out in this Defence, the Claimant is not entitled to pursue the Defendant as either the registered keeper or the driver of the vehicle for the Parking Charge or costs/damages

Statement of truth

[Silver Paw]

Many thanks for the draft defence you have provided.

If I receive a reply to the CPR request I made then I will upload it and attach a link here to get advise about what paragraph to change before sending it to the court.

I will also go back to the retail park and get a picture of the lower section of the sign where the small print is located. Sorry about this. Had I thought through, I would have taken a picture of it.

Please could you let me know when exactly I need to file this defence to the court by ? Will it be 19th June 2025 (28 days from 23rd May 2025 ) or will be 24th June 2025( 33 days from 23rd May 2025) ? Kindly let me know the relevant date and advised me the advantage of sending the defence via post office instead of via e-mail to the court?


Many thanks for your time.

[des8]

It needs to be filed with court and served on defendant's solicitors by 24th June.
IMO sending documents by 1st class post with certificate of posting is better than by email.
I've heard so often about emails "not received" that I prefer old fashioned method which is covered by The Interpretation Act 1978.
Basically it means if you use the post delivery is deemed to have taken place (unless proven otherwise)
So if you use post and obtain certificate of posting it is deemed the court have received it.
So if your defence goes missing, or is mislaid within the court you will not be sanctioned

[Silver Paw]

Many thanks for the reply and confirmation of the filing date. To be on the safer side I can send it on Friday 20th June 25 by first class post to the court and the claimant's solicitor and obtain a proof of posting. I appreciate that it is deed delivered if I obtain a proof of posting. Would sending it by recorded delivery makes a difference or there is little or no difference in how it is sent ? Just wondering if it is worth sending it that way so that I can see that the mail got delivered.

I have taken a picture of the small print and uploaded it to the site. Please see attached link. it will be the last picture.

https://imgur.com/a/f1DQ8da

it says the following:

If payment of the Parking Charge is not made in accordance with the payment terms detailed on the Parking Charge, Excel Parking Services Limited, the Creditor, will be entitled to charge a collection fee of £70.00 on an indemnity basis for costs incurred as a result of debt and /or legal recovery. This collection fee is in addition to the Parking Charge payable by the driver and / or registered keeper under the terms of the contract. Excel Parking Services Limited will be entitled to take legal proceedings to recover any outstanding charges and any interest and costs incurred as a result, also on an indemnity basis.

Hope this is useful for your to provide guidance.

Thank you

[des8]

i rarely use recorded delivery for anything because the recipient can refuse to accept the item. It is then definitely not delivered!

In the light of the small print I'll rework some sections of the defence.
I haven't previously seen that phrase about charging " a collection fee of £70.00 on an indemnity basis for costs .."
It is yet another attempt by a Parking Company to sidestep the Supreme Court ruling about additional charges, and use legalese to frighten victims into paying exorbitant costs

[Silver Paw]

Okay, thanks for the insight regarding recorded delivery post. I did not know that refusing to accept mail is a possibility. I will just send it normal mail and obtain a proof of posting.

Redoing some sections of the defence in light of the small print will be good. It is good to have knowledgeable members who can help us as these wording are I cannot understand.

Many thanks

[des8]

I came to redraft the defence but can't access any of the IMGUR images except the sign.
Could you therefor please post up a copy of the claim form on this thread?