• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

BW Legal County Court Claim - NCP Parking Charge Notice

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • BW Legal County Court Claim - NCP Parking Charge Notice

    Hi, I need some advice about the County court claim form we have received for unpaid parking charge. Car was parked on a car park by the driver in march 2018 operated by NCP and car park is in operation 24 hours and has ANPR cameras. The signs do say about the ANPR cameras. The car was parked there for roughly 30 minutes. We have received various letters but all was ignored never replied until now we have received a county court claim form dated 05/09. We have acknowledged the service online but need to prepare a defence, they issued parking charge for not paying the parking fee. The particulars of the claims are as following.

    ‘’The claimant’s claim is for the sum of £242.24 being monies due from the defendant to the claimant in respect of parking charge notice for a parking contravention which occurred on (date) in the private car park/land at (address of car park) in relation to (car details). The defendant was allowed 28 days from PCN date to pay but failed to do so. Despite demand having been made, the defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability. The claim also includes statuary interest pursuant to section 69 of CC act 1984 at a rate of (%) from the date (date of issue of NTK). The claimant claim includes £60 costs as set out in terms and conditions’’

    we have also received a letter from bw legal of ''notice of county court claim issued'' which says they may enter a CCJ against us on or after 25/09 if we do not contract them or reply to the county claim.
    Do we need to write anything to the bw legal or just defence to the court?

    Please somebody can have a look at the defence below and let me know if that is enough?

    In the County Court Business Centre, Northampton
    Claim No.: XXXXX
    Between

    XXXXX (Claimant)

    and

    XXXXX (Defendant)

    __________________________________________________ _________________________

    Defence Argument


    1. It is admitted that the Defendant was the authorised registered keeper of the vehicle in question at the time of the alleged incident.

    2. The identity of the driver of the vehicle on the date in question has not been ascertained.

    a. The Claimant did not identify the driver
    b. The Defendant has no liability, as they are the Keeper of the vehicle and the Claimant must rely upon the strict provisions of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 in order to hold the defendant responsible for the driver’s alleged breach.
    c. The Claimant's demanding letter failed to evidence any contravention or clear/prominent signage

    3. The Claimant has at no time provided an explanation how the sum has been calculated, the conduct that gave rise to it or how the amount has climbed from £100 to £150. This appears to be an added cost with no reason and an attempt at double recovery, which the POFA Schedule 4 specifically disallows.

    a. The Protection of Freedom Act Para 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper.

    4. The signage was inadequate to form a contract with the motorist

    a. The signage on this site is inadequate to form a contract. It is barely legible, making it difficult to read, it is only visible on foot and not in direct line of site meaning you have to go out of your way to look for the sign

    5. The driver did not enter into any 'agreement on the charge', no consideration flowed between the parties and no contract was established.

    a. In Jolley v Carmel Ltd [2000] 2 EGLR 154, it was held that a party who makes reasonable endeavours to comply with contractual terms, should not be penalised for breach when unable to fully comply with the terms

    6. The claimant has not provided enough details in the particulars of claim to file a full
    defence. In particular, the full details of the contract which it is alleged was broken
    have not been provided.

    a. The Claimant has disclosed no cause of action to give rise to any debt.
    b. The Claimant has stated that a parking charge was incurred.

    7 The Claimant has given no indication of the nature of the alleged charge in the
    Particulars of Claim.
    a. The Claimant has therefore disclosed no cause of action.
    b. The Particulars of Claim contains no details and fails to establish a cause of action which would enable the Defendant to prepare a specific defence. It just states “parking charges” which does not give any indication of on what basis the claim is brought.
    c. There is no information regarding why the charge arose, what the original charge
    was, what the alleged contract was nor anything which could be considered a fair
    exchange of information.
    d. The Particulars of Claim are incompetent in disclosing no cause of action.
    e. On the 20th September 2016 another relevant poorly pleaded private parking
    charge claim by Gladstones was struck out by District Judge Cross of St
    Albans County Court without a hearing due to their ‘roboclaim’ particulars being incoherent, failing to comply with CPR. 16.4 and ‘providing no facts that could give rise to any apparent claim in law.’
    f. On the 27th July 2016 DJ Anson sitting at Preston County Court ruled that the very similar parking charge particulars of claim were efficient and failing to meet CPR 16.4 and PD 16 paragraphs 7.3 – 7.6. He ordered the Claimant in that case to file new particulars which they failed to do and so the court confirmed that the claim be struck out.




    Please help and thanks in advance.
    Tags: None

  • #2
    So it would help to see the original PCN if you still have it.


    There is no such thing as an authorised registered keeper, forget the authorised.

    List the failures of POFA, and the reference numbers

    List the POFA reference number for the keeper liable only for the initial amount.

    There was a recent case reported on Pepipoo of a case in Newcastle where the judge threw out the case as he considered it abuse of process because the claim rose from £100 to £200+

    Comment


    • #3
      Hi Ostell, thanks for your reply. sorry i do not have the original PCN. I will remove the ''authorised'' form the defence and do you think the rest of defence is ok? I do not have any other points to put in the defence specifically for my case. I have already acknowledged the service on MCOL website so this should give us 14 more days? Shall i submit the defence via email?

      Many Thanks

      Comment


      • #4
        Pepipoo thread here

        Comment


        • #5
          Hi Ostell, Thanks for the link. Would you be able to advice about the defence?

          Comment


          • #6
            Difficult to advise as no sight of the PCN and the situation

            You could ask the solicitors acting for all the documents that they will relying on in court, sent by return as they have them to hand in order to start the claim.

            Comment


            • #7
              Hi Ostell, So shall i email Bw legal and ask for a copy of PCN and other letters? If you have a format which I can use to send them email please can you post here that would be very helpful and your help is very much appreciated. I am very worried so please help me with this?

              Many Thanks

              Comment


              • #8
                Hello Baoli,

                I was wondering if you could advise what has happened with your case, as I have a very similar situation going on with BW Legal pursuing me on behalf of Britannia Parking- the annoying thing is I actually bought a ticket but I paid cash so I can't prove it. The alleged offence took place in September 2016 and I just received the court papers today. Any advice you can give me would be much appreciated? Thanks in advance.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Start your own thread so things don't get confused. Difficult to help without information. PCN, signs etc.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Hi Ostel,

                    Back after a year. we submitted defence and never received any DQs from court. we received DQs last month which we sent back and its in process of allocation.

                    BW legal has sent us a pack which contains an offer for £180 and also a point based answer to our defence and says that they have strong case against us.

                    please see below a link for original NTK. Would you able to advise any further if is it worth a try in court? basically driver caught up in new ANPR system.

                    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PLA...ew?usp=sharing

                    Can we argue that NTK does not have period of parking as it has only entry and exit?


                    Many Thanks

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      @OSTELL they are trying it on? maybe

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        They have not given the notice of keeper liability in format required by 9 (2) (f)

                        you can use no period of parking as moving in front of a camera is not, by definition, parking.

                        as they are claiming from the keeper they may only claim for the amount of the original PCN, POFA 4 (5) and they are attempting to recover more than they are entitled to

                        You could try suggesting to BWL that because of the POFA failures their case has no merit and invite them to withdraw

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          hi Ostell,

                          Thanks for your reply.

                          I have a read of POFA 9(2)f but sorry can not understand. Can you please explain a bit more how NTK is not compliant with this?

                          In the letter they said that our defence contains lots of nonsensical points which are not related to this matter so they have a right to highlight this in the court on the issue of cost as abuse of process.

                          is there any way they can claim more in cost than on the claim form?

                          Can they tell the court that they have sent us few offers but we never contacted them in order to get more in cost?

                          Shall we just send an email to BW Legal as you suggested asking to withdraw?

                          Many Thanks

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Hi,

                            Any feed back on above please.

                            thanks

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Read 9(2) (f) in the POFA wording and compare with what is on the NTK. The Act states that the NTK " must state"

                              Comment

                              View our Terms and Conditions

                              LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

                              If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


                              If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.
                              Working...
                              X