CEL filed in small claims against me for non-payment. I've been using ChatGPT to defend it and the case was stayed for 4 months and now I assume they've paid to continue it as I've received the DQ form to complete.
The story:
Attempted to pay at the machine 3 times with contactless, went to get coins and that also failed. Parked for 1:02 hours and attempted to pay on return and still failed.
My defense:
1. The Defendant denies liability for the entirety of the claim.
2. The Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle on the
date in question. The vehicle was parked at the ******, for approximately one hour.
3. The Defendant made a genuine attempt to pay for parking, but
the on-site payment machines were not operational at the time. The
Defendant also attempted to pay via mobile, but the signal in the
area was poor and payment could not be completed.
4. The Claimant is put to strict proof that a valid contract was
formed. In order for a parking charge to be enforceable, the
Claimant must show that:
(a) Clear signage was present and visible,
(b) The terms were accepted by the Defendant,
(c) The Defendant was able to comply with those terms.
5. The inability to pay due to non-functioning machines and poor
mobile signal meant that no practical or lawful method of payment
was available. As a result, no enforceable contract could have
been formed.
6. The Defendant has previously paid at this car park,
demonstrating a willingness to comply with the system when
functional. On this occasion, the Defendant attempted to pay and
did not deliberately avoid doing so.
7. The Defendant responded to the Claimant’s Letter Before Action
within the 30-day period, disputing the debt and requesting
evidence. No response or documentation was received. This is
contrary to the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims and reflects
unreasonable conduct.
8. The Claimant has not provided:
(a) A copy of the original PCN,
(b) Photographic evidence of signage or the vehicle,
(c) A copy of the alleged contract terms,
(d) Evidence of authority from the landowner to operate and
issue charges.
9. The amount claimed (£262.31) is excessive and not a genuine
pre-estimate of loss. The original charge is believed to have been
around £100, and the remainder is an attempt to recover
unjustified “debt recovery” costs, which have already been widely
disallowed in private parking cases.
10. The Defendant made a good-faith offer to settle the original
parking fee prior to proceedings, which the Claimant ignored.
11. If the Claimant possesses CCTV or other footage showing the
Defendant attempting to pay, the Defendant formally requests its
disclosure. Failure to provide such evidence should result in an
adverse inference against the Claimant’s claim.
12. The Claimant's failure to engage or comply with the spirit of
the Pre-Action Protocol, combined with their excessive claim
amount and lack of evidence, renders this claim unfounded and
unfair.
13. The Defendant respectfully requests that the claim be
dismissed in its entirety and that the court consider a costs
order under CPR 27.14(2)(g) for unreasonable conduct by the
Claimant.
This seemed to work as I said, the claim was stayed for 4 months until now.
I'm filling the DQ now. ChatGPT says that I should leave the mediation section blank, though this advice seems good here, I assume due to the recent high court ruling:
https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/letter-of-claim-from-moorside-legal/msg91604/#msg91604