Free Traffic Legal Advice

IN THE COUNTY COURT

Claim No: [Claim Number]

BETWEEN:

Vehicle Control Services Ltd

Claimant

- and -

[Defendant's Full Name]

Defendant

---

DEFENCE

1. The Defendant denies that a contract was formed as alleged by the Claimant.

No Contract Exists

2. The signage at Liverpool John Lennon Airport (JLLA) uses prohibitory language, stating "No Stopping" and "£100 Charge if you Stop." Such language cannot form the basis of a contractual offer, as it does not permit or offer terms capable of acceptance.

3. Even if the sign could be interpreted as offering terms, which is denied, it is ambiguous. It does not specify how long a vehicle must stop to incur the charge or whether stopping momentarily for safety would constitute a breach. Ambiguity in purported terms renders them unenforceable.

4. The £100 charge is clearly punitive, arising from a prohibition, and does not represent a contractual term. Penalty charges are unenforceable unless they reflect a genuine pre-estimate of loss, which the Claimant has not demonstrated.

5. Consequently, the Defendant denies that any enforceable contract was entered into or breached.

No Keeper Liability

6. The Claimant has not clarified whether they are pursuing the Defendant as the registered keeper or the driver, which is prejudicial and undermines the Defendant’s ability to prepare a defence.

7. The Defendant accepts that they are the registered keeper of the vehicle but asserts that any liability as keeper could only arise pursuant to Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA). However, the location of the alleged breach, Liverpool John Lennon Airport (LJLA), is subject to statutory control under airport bylaws. As such, it is not "relevant land" as defined by Schedule 4 of PoFA, and keeper liability cannot arise.

Inadequate Signage

8. The Defendant disputes the Claimant’s assertion that the terms were "clearly displayed." The signage at Liverpool John Lennon Airport fails to meet the standards required to form a binding contract.

9. The signage does not clearly indicate that entering the land would create a contract or that liability would arise for stopping momentarily, rendering the terms unenforceable.

Claimant’s Authority

10. The Claimant is put to strict proof that they have the authority to issue Parking Charge Notices (PCNs) at the location of the alleged incident. This must be demonstrated by way of an unredacted contract with the landowner.

11. It is understood that the Claimant’s authority to issue PCNs extends only to the car parking areas and not to the public roads within the location. The Claimant must prove that the alleged breach occurred in an area where they are authorised to operate.

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.

Signed:


Date: