Author Topic: Court Action - Uk Parking Control Limited  (Read 1822 times)

0 Members and 90 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Court Action - Uk Parking Control Limited
« Reply #15 on: »
Don't overthink this. Anyone can drive any car with the owners/keepers permission as long as they have third party liability insurance. No one except the driver knows who was driving and the burden of proof is on the PPC to prove who the driver was. They cannot assume or infer that it was the keeper. The keeper is under no legal obligation to provide the drivers details.

As this is for the defence of the more recent case, has the Claimant provided any evidence to show that the blue badge was not on display? Did you receive a PCN for this charge? Was it a windscreen NtD or a postal NtK?

As the Claimant has not provided any response to your CPR 31.14 request for full disclosure of all evidence and related documents in respect of the claim, you should add the following to your defence as a part of the "Preliminary Matters" sub-heading:

1. The Defendant would like to bring to the Court's attention that the Claimant has failed to comply with the Defendant's request for full disclosure of all evidence and documents pursuant to CPR 31. The request was made on [date of the request] and to date, the Claimant has not provided the required documents.

2. The Defendant submits that this failure to disclose has significantly prejudiced the Defendant's ability to prepare a comprehensive and effective defence to the claim. The Defendant is unable to fully understand the particulars of the claim without access to the relevant evidence and documentation.

3. In light of the Claimant's non-compliance, the Defendant respectfully requests that the Court considers this failure when evaluating the merits of the Claimant's case. The Defendant primarily seeks an order that the claim be struck out due to the Claimant's failure to comply with the disclosure obligations under CPR 31.

4. In the alternative, should the Court decide not to strike out the claim, the Defendant seeks the following relief:

  a. An order compelling the Claimant to provide full disclosure of all evidence and documents related to the claim within a specified period.

  b. An extension of the deadline for the Defendant to file a full and complete defence, commencing from the date of receipt of the disclosed documents.

  c. Any other sanction or relief the Court deems appropriate, including but not limited to, costs associated with any applications made due to the Claimant's non-compliance.

5. The Defendant reserves the right to amend the defence upon receipt of the disclosed documents.

Thank you for this. I am not too clear on my position either, which probably is not helpful.

1. I have not received any evidence to show the badge was not on display other than what the particulars of claim say which is that not displaying a valid badge

2. I do not recall receiving a NTO or NTO - The Car Park in question operates by ANPR camera though so not sure what evidence they have regarding this.

Thank you for the above notes, Its been a busy start to the week but I aim to have this written by the weekend.


Re: Court Action - Uk Parking Control Limited
« Reply #16 on: »
I'll come at this from a simpler perspective.

Firstly OP, I am not clear about your standing here.

Are you the registered keeper?

If so, did you receive the initial PCN and how? If a Notice to Driver left on the vehicle then what did the driver do? Did you as RK then receive a Notice to Keeper. What did you do?

I ask because on the face of it the demand for interest is an abuse of process and I don't need to know whether there were 2650, 5,650 or a million days since the PCN. IMO, we should try and get back to general legal principles which in this case align:

A claimant should bring their claim in a timely manner. IMO, this 6-year limit is misinterpreted. It is NOT a safety net, it's a maximum limit within which the principle of timeliness still applies.

Here the issues of timely manner and interest claim come into focus.

After determining that a parking charge was due then the creditor, now claimant, was obliged to pursue this in accordance with their CoP and statute or, if they knew the identity of the driver, expeditiously under contract law.

They waited 6 years, let's not dance on the head of a pin about 6 weeks, they waited 6 years. They now expect the court to support their claim to maximum interest because they couldn't be bothered to bring their claim in a timely manner.

Outrageous.

That limit is not there to enable creditors to wait 6 years so that they can maximise their claim and minimise the defendant's ability to recall facts. 

But we need to know more. Did the RK use delaying tactics for 6 years, move house repeatedly, not update DVLA details etc. etc. or was the creditor simply idle?

OP, facts pl.

Thank you for this.

Yes, I am the registered keeper.

I really don't even remember the day in question but I know this was a car I used to drive...because it was so long ago, I can't even recall.

If they did send something 6 years ago, to be honest I doubt it, if they did I would have challenged this at the time as I worked in the area and would have been parked in said location because I was at work. I no longer work there and have not done so for a while but me saying anything other than I go to the area for work would be a lie as I really can't recall the facts.

This is a really good point. I assumed they had 6 years and that's that, but this is true. Why on earth did they wait this long to bring a claim...only to now request maximum interest.

Re: Court Action - Uk Parking Control Limited
« Reply #17 on: »
I'd like to suggest to @DWMB2 that this thread is split into two separate threads, one for each separate claim. It is already getting confusing with replies for the different claims intermingled.

Could the OP please start a new thread for one of the claims and then the mod can split each post from this thread that is relevant to the new thread.
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain

Re: Court Action - Uk Parking Control Limited
« Reply #18 on: »
OP - if you start a new thread for one of the claims, then indicate which replies correspond to it, I can do the necessary splitting.

Re: Court Action - Uk Parking Control Limited
« Reply #19 on: »
OP - if you start a new thread for one of the claims, then indicate which replies correspond to it, I can do the necessary splitting.

Okay Sure, I'll do this now.

Re: Court Action - Uk Parking Control Limited
« Reply #20 on: »
Split topic should be sorted now. Your opening post will now be at the bottom because it was posted more recently than the posts I've moved over, but there's nothing I can do about that.