Britannia Parking / BWLegal - PCN Advice

[RSG1997]

Thank you !, i will make sure to highlight that if they progress it to court. If they do and the information is not detrimental ? I agree with you something does seem fishy.

Hopefully now then I sit and wait for their follow up response which i am hoping never comes just to get rid of this headache haha

[charitynjw]

You query how it can be legally privileged when they state that they will produce it in court I you can only assume that it contains matters detrimental to their case.

You can also say that, as you've made a perfectly legitimate request for disclosure of documents relevant to the instant case, you are not prepared to be ambushed at the court hearing & if necessary will ask for an adjournment.
At their expense!

[RSG1997]

Thank you guys i appreciate your advice and will deffo use if this progresses to a case. I have yet to hear of any response from them , i am hoping this will be dropped and left without any further progression.

[RSG1997]

Back again guys unfortunately ...

Seems when i thought they gave up this has come through my door,

Have you any advice on how to proceed with a defence and how to battle this ?

Thank you !

[ostell]

First of all is acknowledge the claim using the details and password on the form. Nothing in the defence. This gives you 33 dyas from date of issue to get your defence to the court.

I had a look back a page and noted a letter from them stating that they are claiming from you as the registered keeper under POFA. They are also going on to sya thet "wehn you parked your car". Remember that as the keeper they cannot claim for more than the original £100 on the NTK, POFA rles.

[RSG1997]

I have completed the AOS to defend all of the claim. Brilliant so that is another thing i can add to my defence. Is there any particular way i should be writing it or any guidelines to follow ?

Thank you very much !

[ostell]

Look around for other defences that are sort of close to your situation and amend to suit. Post on here for critique before you send.

[charitynjw]

Edit the claim form.
Both the claim no & the password are visible.

[RSG1997]

Hi Guys,

I am really struggling with writing my defence without pasting someone elses and structuring my own. Im finding it difficult to pick out the key points in my defence as i am noticing other peoples go on for pages however i feel like I do not have that much to write ?

Any advice please ? I know the grace periods almost over

[RSG1997]

Claim Number:
BETWEEN:
Britannia Parking Group Limited t/a Britannia Parking (Claimant)
vs
Mr Ryan (Defendant)

__________________________________________________ _________________________

Defence Argument

I am Ryan () of defendant in this matter.

The claim is denied in its entirety except where explicitly admitted here. I assert that I am not liable to the Claimant for the sum claimed, or any amount at all, for the following reasons, any one of which is fatal to the Claimant's case.

1. The Defendant is the registered keeper of the vehicle in question. The Claim relates to an alleged debt in damages arising from a driver's alleged breach of contract, when parking at Frankie’s & Bennies Car Park.

1. As the defendant I have been harassed and constantly bombarded by BW Legal to make prompt payments for the PCN which in my right was unknown to me at the start of these proceedings for payment. The claimant is unable to take steps to enforce the requirement to pay against the driver because the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver so were pursuing me based off assumptions.
2. As the claimant has stated they intend to rely on the POFA and pursue me as the registered keeper. The defendant is being chased for the total of £237.52 when under POFA this states that no more than the initial PCN should be requested from the keeper. The defendant believes the claimant has broken the terms & conditions they are being held too by the POFA.

1. It is submitted that the conduct of the claimant in pursuing this claim is wholly unreasonable and vexatious. As such the defendant is keeping note of wasted time and costs in dealing with this matter

1. The defendant previously sent a SAR to the claimant with legitimate requests for information regarding the case and has been denied the access to the following:

1. “A true copy of the agreement between the landowner (or their authorised agent) & Britannia which - allegedly gives Britannia authority to operate on the relevant land, redacted only as strictly necessary.” The response I received is as follows “9. Please be aware that the contract between Our Client and the landowner is a legally privileged document which you have no right to inspect. However, should this matter progress to court, the contract will be adduced as evidence.” I then met the above with the following: “For completeness, please advise me which of the parties to the contract is a solicitor (or similar), & what is their SRA registration number?” This was met with the same response which has claimed an exemption of legal privilege in not disclosing the landowner/parking company contract, I am doubtful that this contract would have been formed with the specific privilege in mind and the solicitor remained undisclosed. I have made a perfectly legitimate request for disclosure of documents relevant to the instant case, I as the defendant am not prepared to be ambushed at the court hearing & if necessary will ask for an adjournment at the claimant’s expense.

1. “A true copy of planning permission for the erection of site signs.”
2. “A true copy of all site signs which Britannia propose to use in evidence.”

1. No agreement to any contract was made by the defendant involved. The vehicle was using the parking services offered FOC by the restaurant, I believe it would be unfair to assume that 20 minutes which has been stated by the claimant is an appropriate max amount of time to dine in a restaurant. Upon speaking to the staff they agreed but were unable to lift the PCN due to no longer having the receipt of what was purchased.

1. The elements of offer, acceptance and consideration both ways have therefore not been satisfied and so no contract can exist.

1. The Claimant has no standing to bring a case.

1. Neither the claim form, nor the signage state who the owner of the land is.

1. Previous letters to the defendant from BW Legal have stated that the £60.00 claimed is "for our debt recovery costs".
2. Legal services cannot be claimed in the small claims court as per CPR 27.14
3. The claim includes a sum of £60, described as "liable for our £60.00 instructions fee". This work is done as part of the Claimant's everyday routine and no "expert services" are involved. The Claimant is put to strict proof, by way of timesheets or otherwise, to show how this cost has been incurred.

1. In summary it is the defendant’s position that the claim discloses no cause of action, is without merit and has no prospect of success. Accordingly the court is invited to strike out the claim of its own initiative using its case management powers pursuant to CPR 3.4

1. The Unfair terms in the Consumer contact regulations 1999 applies.

The above is what i have so far , i am unsure to how to do the bullet points layout (Numbers, Letters , ect )

Thank you,

[charitynjw]

If it were me I'd point out, towards the beginning of the defence, that this is a claim for parking in a restaurant car park where the parking co have unreasonably imposed a 20 minute limit for restaurant customers.
That should grab the judge's interest!

[RSG1997]

Brilliant i will add that to the beginning. I am gonna work on it a bit more tonight so hopefully should repost a more cleaner version. Would the claimant be BWLegal or Britannia that i would be fighting against ?

[RSG1997]

IN THE COUNTY COURT


Claim Number:


BETWEEN:
Britannia Parking Group Limited t/a Britannia Parking / BWLegal (Claimant)
vs
Mr Ryan (Defendant)

__________________________________________________ _________________________

Defence Argument

I am Ryan the defendant in this matter.

The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all. I assert that I am not liable to the Claimant for the sum claimed, or any amount at all, for the following reasons, any one of which is fatal to the Claimant's case. I must state that this is a claim for parking in a restaurant car park where the parking company have unreasonably imposed a 20-minute limit for restaurant customers.

1. The Defendant is the registered keeper of the vehicle in question. The Claim relates to an alleged debt in damages arising from a driver's alleged breach of contract, when parking at Frankie’s & Bennies Car Park on the 8th January 2019.

2. As the defendant I have been harassed and bombarded by BW Legal who have stated that they have been instructed by Britannia Parking Group, to recover a due balance for a PCN, which I would like to state that no previous letters were known to me on arrival for the reduction of the charge or of the charge in question, until requested by a SAR sent to them. This was unknown to me at the start of these proceedings for payment that the contravention even took place.

1. I believe the claimant is unable to take steps to enforce the requirement to pay against the driver because the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver so were pursuing me based off assumptions. In compliance with (2)(e) of the POFA, they must state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and current address and instead assumed that I was in the first instance without acknowledging that they did not know clearly. I feel like this was mainly targeted at myself to add pressure to make a prompt payment and was not made clear that they were not aware on who was involved and wasn’t openly declared.

1. I would like to state in the dispute I sent, BWLegal are claiming the following “Our Client's cause of action is that you breached the terms and conditions of the contract which you entered into by parking your vehicle in the car park for longer than the maximum time permitted.” which in my eyes shows that they are assuming and pursuing me as the driver of the vehicle which is not known to them and only can pursue and chase myself as the keeper of the vehicle. This I see as a break of the terms and conditions set out by the POFA.

1. In the dispute that was sent I was denied a picture and a map showing where any signs were displayed. A copy of the agreement between the landowner/authorised agent & Britannia was requested, the defendant received the following response “Please be aware that the contract between Our Client and the landowner is a legally privileged document which you have no right to inspect. However, should this matter progress to court, the contract will be adduced as evidence. “The defendant to prepare themselves needed additional information and continued with the following “For completeness, please advise me which of the parties to the contract is a solicitor (or similar), & what is their SRA registration number?” This request by the defendant was met with the exact response it was met with previously, was the contract formed with that type of privilege in mind? And even so how it can be legally privileged when it is stated that they will produce it in court.

1. I have made a perfectly legitimate request for disclosure of documents relevant to the instant case, I as the defendant am not prepared to be ambushed at the court hearing & if necessary, will ask for an adjournment at the claimant’s expense.
2. It is submitted that the conduct of the claimant in pursuing this claim is wholly unreasonable and vexatious. As such the defendant is keeping note of wasted time and costs in dealing with this matter and such distress to current mental heatlh issues which this is causing.

1. No agreement to any contract was made by the defendant involved. The vehicle was believed to be using the parking services offered FOC by the restaurant, I believe it would be unfair to assume that 20 minutes which has been stated by the claimant is an appropriate max amount of time to dine in a restaurant.

1. The elements of offer, acceptance and consideration both ways have therefore not been satisfied and so no contract can exist.

1. The defendant was told the following in response to my appeal from BWLegal “It is unnecessary to apply an analysis of offer, acceptance and consideration quite simply because the contract was formed on mutual promises. By parking your vehicle in the car park you have entered into a unilateral contract with Our Client. Acceptance does not have to be communicated, the act of parking your vehicle is acceptance.” This was not communicated to me in any way that simply leaving a vehicle there would be acceptance of a contract forming. Surely if two parties were involved as they say in a “commercial” contract both parties would have a clear understanding of the terms & conditions before accepting. I see nothing mutual about this.

1. The Claimant has no standing to bring a case.

1. Neither the claim form, nor the signage state who the owner of the land is.

1. The defendant is being chased for an additional £60.00 for, as stated by BWLegal, “the sum of £60.00 attributable towards these costs are entirely reasonable for nature and type of work involved in recovering the parking charge”, which I think is highly unreasonable to add additional charges to a PCN, when I am trying to defend myself and appeal.

1. Previous letters to the defendant from BW Legal have stated that the £60.00 claimed is "for our debt recovery costs" then this has switched to “instruction fees”, the switching of the names proves inconsistent in knowing what the fees are for and why they are required and how this relates to the PCN.

1. Legal services cannot be claimed in the small claims court as per CPR 27.14

1. As the claimant has stated they intend to rely on the POFA and pursue me as the registered keeper. The defendant is being chased for the total of £237.52 when under POFA this states that no more than the initial PCN should be requested from the keeper under (9)(2)(f). The defendant believes the claimant has broken the terms & conditions they are being held too by the POFA they are relying on by adding additional charges.

1. The claim includes a sum of £60, described as "liable for our £60.00 instructions fee". This work is done as part of the Claimant's everyday routine and no "expert services" are involved. The Claimant is put to strict proof, by way of timesheets or otherwise, to show how this cost has been incurred.

1. In summary it is the defendant’s position that the claim discloses no cause of action, is without merit and has no prospect of success. Accordingly, the court is invited to strike out the claim of its own initiative using its case management powers pursuant to CPR 3.4

1. The Unfair terms in the Consumer contact regulations 1999 applies.

I believe the facts contained in this Defence are true.


Name

Signature

Date



I will need to submit this in two days , yikes ! I am wondering do i need to upload or attach all previous emails sent and received between all parties involved ?

[JD1962]

You query how it can be legally privileged when they state that they will produce it in court I you can only assume that it contains matters detrimental to their case.

Dear RSG1997 and OSTELL

I've read with interest your posts on the Britannia PCN. Thank you for such thorough communication.

I recently had a PCN from Horizon Parking for not validating my stay in a Sainsburys car park whilst shopping there. I paid up as I was about to go on holiday and had no time to formulate a response. I did contact both the store manager and Horizon. The store manager has contacted Horizon but they have not replied. Still ongoing but I doubt I'll' see my £42 again. Meanwhile I've not been to the store since and have let the manager know I won't be unless Horizon explain themselves. I don't have the shopping receipt but do have a credit card statement showing the purchase.

Now my son has a PCN from Britannia for parking in a pub car park, £60. I'm somewhat angry that by entering a car park they consider that I have automatically entered into a contract with them. He was in the pub and forgot to validate his stay via the on-bar touch screen. He does not have a receipt so has nothing to prove he was in the pub during his stay. Advise from friends is ignore and they'll give up. We now have a letter and form from BW Legal same as yours.

I'll copy the same letters as yours and post by recorded delivery to bide some time.

Would be interested to know the outcome of your communications with them please.

Regards
Jon