Claim received from MInster Baywatch

[Maza43]

Particulars of Claim dated 5th July 2024
The driver of the vehicle with registraion xxxxxx (the vehicle) parked in breach of the terms of parking stipulated on the signage (The Contract) at York MIll House Car Park on 05/02/2024 thus incurring the parking charge (the PCN).
The PCN was not paid within 28 days of issue. The Claimant claims the unpaid PCN from the Defendant as the driver/keeper of the vehicle.
Despite demands being made, the Defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability.
THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS £100 for the PCN, £55 contractual costs pursuant to the contract and PCN terms and conditions together with statutory interest of £3.84 pursuant to s69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at 8% per annum, continuing at £0.03 per day.

Hi,I have received a Claim for court from Gladstones sols acting for Minster Baywatch, i have acknowledge the claim at moneyclaim.gov on 10th July and sent a SAR to Minster and the CPR31.14 to Gladstones. The defendant has been parking in this car park for work, (4 bays allocated for employees) The Authorised Vehicles only parking sign is opposite where they park. They had to park for half an hour until one of their parking spots became free from a colleague . Hence the PCNs and court claim. They have no PCNS and they no longer work there but a colleague has forwarded pictures of the car park and signage. I have also asked for the documention, agreements and signage from the claimant.

Do I now put a defence together in anticipation of receiving the docs, if they bother to send them. Please Help

[des8]

As you have acknowledge the claim you have 33 days in which to file a defence, so no need to rush.

If you want, post up redacted photos of claim form and PCN and pictures of signage and we can help draft your defence nearer the date

[Maza43]

As you have acknowledge the claim you have 33 days in which to file a defence, so no need to rush.

If you want, post up redacted photos of claim form and PCN and pictures of signage and we can help draft your defence nearer the date

Thankyou, will do

[Maza43]

Redacted photo of claim form and pictures of sign and car park, the driver usually parks opposite the signs but was waiting for a car space. Hope they are eligible to read.

[des8]

can't see any photos

[Maza43]

[Maza43]

can you see these ?

[des8]

OK that's fine.
Now send a subject access request to Minster and a CPR31.14 request to Gladstones.
There are templates (need amending to your situation) in SHORTCUTS panel on right of this page
Do not identify the driver when writing

[Maza43]

Thanks Des8 already sent with cert of posting will work on defence over next few days. Thanks for your help.

[Maza43]

This is my defence so far, particulars of claim only included on claim form, no points to reference to have been given to me. Re parking sign it reads"This includes making required payment entering your vehicle reg details via the payment and/or terminals. Failure to do so is a breach of the Parking Contract. There are no payment terminals or IPads to enter your reg," If appropriate be included on an authorised user list for this site."

[Maza43]

Defence claim 1772024.pdf

[Maza43]

I have today received from Gladstones Sols a copy of the Notice to Keeper and a copy of the demand for payment of unpaid charge with lots of photos of the defendants parked car. PCNS and the agreement with the landowner regarding the land where also requested but not received, they have advised that their clients intends to rely upon the judgment of One Parking Solution Ltd v Norma Wilshaw specifically paras 32 and 33 where the judge held that it was not necessary for the claimant to prove the landowners authority to sue that "a possessory title is good enough against anyone without a better title".
My defence is going to need a lot of correcting and I am at a loss. The first defence was picked over from a previous claim that the defendant won in court with similar but not exact parking signs.
Thanks for reading

[des8]

The reasons for requesting a copy of the agreement between the land owner and parking company is to enable you to scrutinise it to make sure the parking company have not exceeded their authority.

Your defence doesn't have to be in until beginning of August, so will look at it later if you give me a nudge

[Maza43]

Thanks Des8 I’m just looking at case files to put a new defence together

[Maza43]

I've received a reply from MBW following the SARs letter requesting confirmation of defendants name and address on Bank Statement etc re Data Protection, do i send it ? they advise they have 30 days to respond does that then push my defence requirement date ?

I was going to incorporate this in my defence regarding their reliance upon the judge of OPS v Wilshaw

The DLUHC's analysis overides plainly wrong findings by Circuit judges steered by council in weak appeal cases that the parking industry steamrolled through.
District judges deal with private parking claims on a daily basis whereas cases of this nature come before Circuit judges infrequently.

The judgments of HHJ Simpkiss in One Parking Solution v Wilshaw were flawed. These supposedly persuasive judgments included a universal failure to consider the court's duty under s71 of the CRA 2015 and factual errors, a badly outdated reliance on 'ticket cases' which allowed poor signage to escape fair scrutiny and a wrong presumption that landowner authority 'is not required' (DVLA rules make it mandatory)