Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hi All,

I am being pursued for being "not parked within a marked bay" at Arena Shopping Park Coventry in April 2024.

A claim was issued by BW Legal on behalf of Premier Park in July 2025 with the standard lacking PoC. I submitted the standard PoC insufficient defence (the short MCOL paste-able version). I've done the mediation using standard advice.

A court date in October has now been set, with doc submissions by 22 April.

I genuinely have no recollection of the incident and therefore have no idea where to go from here. How can I be expected submit a witness statement, when the claimant has provided absolutely no detail on what the claim is about?

One thing that may or may not be noteworthy- I was not the keeper of the vehicle. It was via a friend's work car scheme whereby they (the friend's employer) retained keepership and it was just with me (and other insured parties) as driver. I assume the POFA rules for this are something like leasing/hiring.

Any advice on how to proceed from here much appreciated.

As I mentioned, I have no idea what the circumstances were. Nor do I have the original PCN.

I would have been sent the PCN by the company at the time and appealed with a generic appeal, or the company would have told them that I was the 'keeper'.

I can share the court docs if necessary - but it's the standard PoC with zero detail seen round here 1000 times.

I'm really just seeking advice on how to approach the situation given the fact that I have no idea of the circumstances. I can't quite understand how the court could expect me to respond when the Particulars of Claim are so insufficient.

Fair enough - I suppose I'm being cocky (sorry!) cos I've literally dealt with 10 of these cases for people based on the advice here, and never has it actually gone near a court!

LETTER OF CLAIM:



CLAIM FORM:



THEIR DQ:

https://ibb.co/TM0W3h5d
https://ibb.co/chhZ71WY
https://ibb.co/gF7QJn5W
https://ibb.co/jC1FqFB
https://ibb.co/6RrBvP2r
https://ibb.co/nsyLzTcF
https://ibb.co/hJjcwSbC
https://ibb.co/TqDdvW8z
https://ibb.co/0j5c3s1D

NOTICE OF ALLOCATION:
https://ibb.co/qLw0fD42
https://ibb.co/Xf5ynk9B
https://ibb.co/F4nQLdsW
https://ibb.co/cXCfq8NF

I used this standard defence (pasted here from another post) via MCOL:

1. The Defendant denies the claim in its entirety. The Defendant asserts that there is no liability to the Claimant and that no debt is owed. The claim is without merit and does not adequately disclose any comprehensible cause of action.

2. There is a lack of precise detail in the Particulars of Claim (PoC) in respect of the factual and legal allegations made against the Defendant such that the PoC do not adequately comply with CPR 16.4.

3. The Defendant is unable to plead properly to the PoC because:

(a) The contract referred to is not detailed or attached to the PoC in accordance with PD 16, para 7.3(1);

(b) The PoC do not state the exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions of the contract (or contracts) which is/are relied on;

(c) The PoC do not adequately set out the reason (or reasons) why the claimant asserts the defendant has breached the contract (or contracts);

(d) The PoC do not state with sufficient particularity exactly where the breach occurred, the exact time when the breach occurred and how long it is alleged that the vehicle was parked before the parking charge was allegedly incurred;

(e) The PoC do not state precisely how the sum claimed is calculated, including the basis for any statutory interest, damages, or other charges;

(f) The PoC do not state what proportion of the claim is the parking charge and what proportion is damages;

(g) The PoC do not provide clarity on whether the Defendant is sued as the driver or the keeper of the vehicle, as the claimant cannot plead alternative causes of action without specificity.

4. The Defendant submits that courts have previously struck out materially similar claims of their own initiative for failure to adequately comply with CPR 16.4, particularly where the Particulars of Claim failed to specify the contractual terms relied upon or explain the alleged breach with sufficient clarity.

5. In comparable cases involving modest sums, judges have found that requiring further case management steps would be disproportionate and contrary to the overriding objective. Accordingly, strike-out was deemed appropriate. The Defendant submits that the same reasoning applies in this case and invites the court to adopt a similar approach by striking out the claim due to the Claimant’s failure to adequately comply with CPR 16.4, rather than permitting an amendment. The Defendant proposes that the following Order be made:

Draft Order:

Of the Court's own initiative and upon reading the particulars of claim and the defence.

AND the court being of the view that the particulars of claim do not adequately comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a) because: (a) they do not set out the exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions of the contract which is (or are) relied on; and (b) they do not adequately set out the reason (or reasons) why the claimant asserts that the defendant was in breach of contract.

AND the claimant could have complied with CPR 16.4(1)(a) had it served separate detailed particulars of claim, as it could have done pursuant to PD 7C, para 5.2, but chose not to do so.

AND upon the Court determining, having regard to the overriding objective (CPR 1.1), that it would be disproportionate to direct further pleadings or to allot any further share of the Court’s resources to this claim (for example by ordering further particulars of claim and a further defence, with consequent case management).

ORDER:

1. The claim is struck out.

2. Permission to either party to apply to set aside, vary or stay this order by application on notice, which must be filed at this Court not more than 7 days after service of this order, failing which no such application may be made.

Hi All

Bumping this... could really use some advice please!

Thanks in advance.

This is what I've got so far for my WS... any feedback appreciated.

I,... will say as follows:

1. I am the Defendant in these proceedings. The facts in this statement are within my own knowledge save where otherwise stated, in which case I identify the source of my information or belief. I believe them to be true.

THE VEHICLE

2. At all material times, the vehicle registration `[REG]` — a Suzuki Swace Ultra Hybrid — was supplied to me under a company car scheme made available through a friends-and-family arrangement operated in connection with a friend's employer. Under that arrangement the vehicle was supplied, insured and registered by the scheme's finance or leasing company.

3. To the best of my knowledge and belief, the registered keeper of the vehicle on 1 April 2024, as recorded on the V5C registration document issued by the DVLA, was the finance or leasing company that supplied the vehicle under the scheme. I was not the registered keeper.

THE ALLEGED EVENT

4. I have no recollection of the event alleged by the Claimant — a parking contravention said to have occurred at Arena Shopping Park, Coventry, on 1 April 2024.

5. I do not admit that I was the driver of the vehicle at the time and place alleged.

NOTICES

6. I have no recollection of receiving any Notice to Driver, Notice to Keeper or Notice to Hirer from the Claimant in respect of this matter. The Claimant has not disclosed any such notice in these proceedings.

THE CLAIM

7. The only statement of the Claimant's case served on me is the short summary set out in the N1SDT claim form. No separate particulars of claim — whether pleaded as a standalone document or appended to the claim form — have been served.

8. At the date and time of this witness statement, the Claimant has not yet served its evidence in these proceedings pursuant to the directions made in the Notice of Allocation dated 25 March 2026.

9. Despite pre-action correspondence conducted by the Claimant's solicitors and the subsequent issue of proceedings, prior to the date of this witness statement the Claimant has at no stage provided me with:

   (a) a copy of the contract or the signage terms said to have been in force at the site on 1 April 2024;

   (b) photographs of the signage;

   (c) a site plan of the car park;

   (d) any Notice to Keeper or Notice to Hirer; or

   (e) any evidence as to the identity of the driver of the vehicle at the material time.

DEFENCE

10. I rely on the matters set out in my Defence dated `[DATE OF DEFENCE]`.


STATEMENT OF TRUTH

I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement 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.