Free Traffic Legal Advice

Received a parking change notice from UK Car Park Management (UKCPM).


They claim my vehicle had been parked in breach of terms and conditions at their parking near a shop in Berkshire (England).
There are two pictures on the PCN. One stating 13:29, another 14:23 on the same day.


Incident time listed as 14:23. UKCPM has never sent me the details about which terms were breached. When I checked the sign near the parking lot, it says parking is allowed for max 30 minutes with no returns.


My vehicle was nowhere near that parking at 14:23 on that day though. It was parked at my drive about 8 miles away.
I recorded a dash-cam video my vehicle entering my drive at 14:11 and staying there for an hour (well after 14:23).
Also I have a receipt from a shop near my home at 14:04.


I appealed the PCN but UKCPM never replied.


About a month ago I received a claim form from CNBC.
The particulars of the claim:

---

"The driver of the vehicle with registration XXXXX parked in breach of the terms of parking stipulated on the signage (the 'Contract') at <address> on XXXX thus incurring the parking charge (the PCN). The PCN was not paid within 28 days of issue. The claimant claims the unpaid PCN from the Defendant as the driver/keeper of the Vehicle. Despite demands being made, the Defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability. The claimant claims £80 for the PCN, £60 contractual consts pursuant to the contract and PCN terms."

---

I sent my defense stating that I have video recording contradicting claimant's PCN must be invalid thus rendering whole claim false.


Now I've received Notice of Proposed Allocation to the Small Claims Track and have until 26 November to send back the questionnaire.


I am a bit lost here. I expected the next step would be where I'd send my evidence to CNBC and then whole claim would be dismissed as it makes no sense.
There was clearly a mistake

To be honest, I am looking for an advice regarding the process of supplying my video recording to CNBC in the hopes of getting this claim dismissed.

They are represented by Gladstones Solicitors.

Particulars of the claim is literally:

"The driver of the vehicle with registration XXXXX parked in breach of the terms of parking stipulated on the signage (the 'Contract') at <address> on XXXX thus incurring the parking charge (the PCN). The PCN was not paid within 28 days of issue. The claimant claims the unpaid PCN from the Defendant as the driver/keeper of the Vehicle. Despite demands being made, the Defendant has failed to settle their outstanding liability. The claimant claims £80 for the PCN, £60 contractual costs pursuant to the contract and PCN terms."

What was the precise wording of your defence? You are not answering the questions.

This claim will be struck out if we can know how you’ve defended it as there is a very serious fault in those Particulars of Claim (PoC).

From what you’ve shown us, they fails to comply with CPR 16.4, (1)(a) in particular. There is no cause of action stated. Simply stating “the driver breached the terms of parking” is not acceptable and there is plenty of persuasive case law to have this thrown out as a preliminary matter.

Unfortunately, if that was not raised in the defence, you will have to hope the case management judge takes unilateral action or else you will have to introduce it as a preliminary matter at the hearing and in your WS.

Assume you knew nothing about this before receiving the claim, how could you possible plead any defence based on those PoC?

So, please tell us exactly what you put in as your defence.

[deleted]

Surely, sending out PCNs with forget pictures should not be considered a normal business.

Do you have sound evidence of forgery? I note your evidence that the vehicle is elsewhere, but this does not on its own suggest image tampering - an ANPR misread, a dodgy clock on the ANPR (if your vehicle was there at another time, for example), or plate cloning could all apply here. The latter of these is of course the least likely.

I'm not seeking to discourage complaints, but if you are planning to accuse them of forging pictures to invent a charge (which would on the face of it be potentially accusing them of criminal fraud), I'd make sure you've got good grounds to do so having ruled out other possibilities.