Parking eye please help

[parismark99]

Hello all, I recently received a fine for parking in my pharmacy car park as I failed to register my vehicle in the pharmacy. I appealed the fine but unfortunately I did not receive the second letter requesting additional information. I was initially advised by the pharmacy that I should request to parking eye that they contact the surgery for confirmation that I had been picking up my prescription. I have since been sent a court order to pay £120 fine, £50 legal fees and the court fee. Can I counter claim the full amount. I am going to go and measure the sign as I have read a thread on here that used that to claim that the contract was unlawful. Any other info would be a great help.

[des8]

Can you please post up:
i)the original notice to keeper
ii)Photo of the signs at the inside and at the entrance to car park
iii)copy of your court papers (which I hope is only the court claim and not a default judgment!)

[parismark99]

Can you please post up:
i)the original notice to keeper
ii)Photo of the signs at the inside and at the entrance to car park
iii)copy of your court papers (which I hope is only the court claim and not a default judgment!)

Thank you I will get this over asap

[parismark99]

Hello, I have attached all of the information other than the second notice, I'm not sure if there is anything that can be done?

[des8]

The claim form was issued on the 8th January.
Did you acknowledge receipt within the first 14 days?
If not do so now and hope PE haven't applied for a default judgement already

[parismark99]

I have confused matters, this is a second ticket I am appealing, the first one has gone to court this is the one I am hoping to contest and is on a 28 day noitce now whilst I get info together

[des8]

If you re referring to the claim with issue date 8th Jan, and you acknowledged receipt in time, then you have 33 days from issue date in which to submit defence. (28 days + postal time). So if my math is correct defence due by 10th Feb

What info are you "getting together"/

[parismark99]

I have collected photos of the signage, I also need to talk to the surgery to get them to send me out confirmation email. I read an article some time back which mentioned something about the signage not conforming to the British Parking Association guidelines on sizing.

[des8]

Have you measured the font size if you think there is a problem for PE?
Draft defence for you to amend as you wish:
It is for you to check and ensure it meets your requirements
You will need to send it as a PDF attached to an email (to both court & claimant
Use 12.5 font like times New Roman with 1.5 line spacing
Court claim number in top right of each numbered page
In the County Court Centre Claim No.
Between
PARKINGEYE Ltd (Claimant)
and
Mr ………. (Defendant)
DEFENCE

1. The Defendant received the claim No: from ParkingEye Ltd on dd. mm.yy
2. Each and every allegation in the Claimants statement of case is denied unless specifically admitted in this Defence.

3. The defendant avers the Claimant's statement of case firstly fails to give adequate information to enable the Defendant to properly assess the Defendant's position with regards to the claim and secondly has failed to properly plead its case in accordance with CPR16.4(1)(a)
i) the Particulars of Claim (PoC) do not specify on what basis the Defendant is liable: whether as the Driver
and/or hirer and/or keeper of the vehicle and fails to provide any reasons on which the Claimant relies upon to prove such liabilities.
4. It is well established that the Claimant must provide adequate pleadings and include all essential ingredients of the cause of action so as to enable the Defendant to understand the case against them. The Particulars of Claim, as drafted, are inadequate which makes it difficult for the Defendant to respond as he does not know or understand the basis of the Claimant’s case.
The Defendant avers the lack of compliance with the CPR 16.4(1)(a) to formulate proper particulars should not be excused and accordingly, the court is invited to consider its general case management powers pursuant to CPR 3.1 to:

1. make an order that unless the Claimant (i) files and re-serves an amended Particulars of Claim compliant with CPR 16.4(1)(a) and (ii) provide the necessary documentation in order for The Defendant to fully plead his case within 14 days of said order, then the claim shall be struck out and judgment entered in favour of the Defendant;
2. If the Claimant should comply with such an order, the Defendant will then be in a position to amend his defence, and would ask that the Claimant bears the costs of the amendment.
   Or
3. if the court considers it appropriate, to strike out the claim in whole or in part, as the basis that the claim discloses no reasonable grounds for a cause of action; and
4. exercise any other case management powers the court sees fit
5. Without prejudice to the foregoing paragraphs, the Defendant intends to respond to the allegations raised in the Particulars of Claim as best he is able.

6. The Claimant's Particulars of Claim state that authorisation is required for vehicles to park at the site and that the vehicle was parked " without authorisation", Confusingly the PoC also refers to a contract.
The defendant avers that it is not possible to contract to do something which is forbidden,(i'e. park without authority)
So to park without authority is not to be in breach of a contract, but is to commit a trespass, for which only the possessor of the land can sue for damages


Defendant’s liability as the driver of the vehicle
7 It is the Defendant’s position that the Claimant’s allegations are nothing more than a fishing expedition and the Claimant has no knowledge of the driver.

8.Defendant’s liability as the hirer
The claimant fails to state if the driver was the hirer of the vehicle, nor how the liability for an unpaid parking charge may be transferred from the driver to the hirer of a vehicle .
The Defendant notes that liability may be transferred if the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) complies with regulations set out in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4
The PCN did not comply with the appropriate regulations
9 Defendants liability as the Keeper
It is admitted the Defendant is the keeper of the vehicle , but the claimant fails to state if he holds the defendant liable, nor how the liability for an unpaid parking charge might be transferred from the driver to the Keeper of a vehicle
The Defendant notes that liability may be transferred if the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) complies with regulations set out in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4
The PCN did not comply with the appropriate regulations in that:

i) doesn't actually state the period of parking. What it states is the time between entry and departure.
ii)The keeper has not been invited to pay the unpaid parking charges as mandated (para 9 (2) (e) (i)


10 Recovery of Claimant’s unspecified parking and collection charges
The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to the recovery of unspecified parking and collection charges in respect of the PCN(s) against the Defendant as either the driver or the hirer or the keeper for the following reasons:
(i)in respect of liability as the driver the Defendant repeats paragraphs 7 & 8 of this Defence
(ii)in respect of liability as the hirer or the keeper of the vehicle there is no statutory manner in which liability can be transferred from the contracting party to either the hirer or the owner

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.
Signature Date