SIP sent me county court papers - help! deadline approaching **Claim Struck Out**

[buttered_toast2003]

I posted this on MSE and Pepipoo but haven't had much help.

In March last year my vehicle received a Parking Charge Notice and after reading advice on here and MSE chose to ignore it. Four months later a notice to owner was received. Several letters have now been received even received some stating PoFA which was not in place at the time of being sent the notice to owner. Now I've received county court claim forms and have logged into MCOL to defend it. Particulars of claim states that the terms and conditions were breached by not displaying a ticket.

 

I now have 7 days left to submit my defence (I have already sent back a response saying defend in full) and ma panicking a lot!

 

The driver has never been identified and no contact has been made with SIP. When the car was parked the sign stating these so called terms and conditions was round the corner from where it was parked so the sign wasn't seen, plus the car wasn't parked in what was considered to be their car park. I already know that SIP do not own the land and attempts to get in touch with the landowner have been fruitless. The building on site does not belong to the land owner so surely there was no loss of business. Also because the sign was not seen (I've since returned to the car park and the signs are really high up!) does this mean no contract was entered into? Please help!

 

Also, do I submit a full defence, or just bullet points and build on it in a letter to the court?

[BankFodder]

I'm sorry that you received advice to ignore it on this forum. That is not the correct advice. If people ignore these things, it gives courage to the other side that you will ignore everything that they will get a judgment by default. Pepipoo is good - and I am surprised that you didn't get help there.

 

Don't worry, there is a high chance that you will succeed - and we will help you.

 

Please read through the forum and get to understand what the arguments are.

Your defence will basically be

 

• that you deny that you are indebted.
  
• You deny that there was any contract.
  
• That even if there was a contract, any term which they are attempting to rely upon is an unenforceable penalty because the money they claim is in excess of any administrative losses which may have been caused by you.
  
• That the term they are trying to rely upon is also unfair under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts regs. for the same reason - and therefore invalid.
  

 

 

• And that in any event, they are not the owners of the carpark and furthermore they have no interest in the land which entitles them to enter into any contract or to name themselves as a claimant in the proceedings -
  
• and furthermore, they do not have any authority from the landowners to bring any proceedings.
  

 

However, before we settle this.

Please lay out the exact facts - including who what where nature of signage etc.

 

In the meantime, write a letter to them - recorded and tell them that you want

 

• details breakdown of any losses which they say were sustained by them and which they say were caused by you.
  
• details of any losses which have been sustained by the landowner and which they say were caused by you
  
• Evidence that they have the locus standii to sue you - and also written evidence that they are authorised by the landowner to do so.
  

 

Tell them that you will be defending their claim and that you will be informing the court that you have made these requests and that if they refuse or fail to provide you with the information, that you will inform the court of that refusal or failure.

[buttered_toast2003]

I tried to send you a PM but I'm not allowed to it seems and don;t want to give too much information on an open forum as I know PPCs frequent certain forums. Anyway, there was a sign round the corner but not on the part where the vehicle in question was, as this was a reserved space and not owned by the PPC (I was given permission to park here by the business on site). Therefore, no sign was seen.

[BankFodder]

Don't worry about being monitored by them. It doesn't matter. What have you got to hide. We only deal in truth here - and so does the court.

 

Please answer the questions.

[BankFodder]

Please give more details. Photo of sign - please describe how the special permission was obtained. That part will be very helpful.

What a shame you ignored it all.

[buttered_toast2003]

Exact facts:

 

Car was parked at gym. Gym has a few spaces out front which are reserved for staff - was given permission from staff to park here as it was quiet and no one about (sunday morning). No sign was noticed where car was parked. Round the side of the building is the SIP car park. If car is parked here, ticket is always purchased. As car was parked in a reserved spot, saw no reason to purchase ticket (as well as no sign indicating these spots belonged to SIP).

The gym rents the land off the landowner (obv) but the landowner also rents out the land to the car park to use.

 

Where there is a sign, it was pretty high up. T&Cs (if any) were probably in very small text. Refer to themselves on the PCN as stop illegal parking, but on their website they are 'simple intelligent parking', as they are also on the BPA website.

[buttered_toast2003]

No idea how permission was obtained! Was just told that the landowner rents out the land to the PPC.

 

I don't have a photo of the sign but can probably source one from google street view?

 

Re ignoring it, I did this because this was the advice given at the time when the PCN was received (Apr 2012)

[BankFodder]

Thank you.

 

Write the letter I have suggested.

 

Do it now and send it recorded.

 

Is there anyone at the gym who will confirm that they gave you permission? Can you get a name?

 

 

Write the following defence:

 

 

1. The claimant are not the owners of the carpark and furthermore they have no interest in the land which entitles them to enter into any contract or to name themselves as a claimant in the proceedings
   
2. and furthermore, they do not have any authority from the landowners to bring any proceedings.
   

Therefore the claim should be struck out

 

Furthermore, you were not parked on land owned or controlled by the claimants, you were parked in a parking space reserved for the staff of the XXX gym with their full knowledge and permission

In any event:-

 

1. you deny that you are indebted.
   
2. You deny that there was any contract.
   
3. That even if there was a contract, any term which they are attempting to rely upon is an unenforceable penalty because the money they claim is in excess of any administrative losses which may have been caused by you.
   
4. That the term they are trying to rely upon is also unfair under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts regs. for the same reason - and therefore invalid.
   
5. You put the claimants to proof of their administrative losses and of their locus standii
   

 

 

[BankFodder]

If the sign was really out of sight - or if the wording was really unclear then insert a par.6

 

In any event the positioning/wording of any signs was such that they were not brought to the notice of the defendant and were therefore not properly incorporated into any contract

Only put this if you have not used the car park before and were unaware of the signs or the terms.

[BankFodder]

By the way, was the pcn isued by way of a ticket? If so, do you still have it and the envelope - and can you show them or describe them

[buttered_toast2003]

Is this to be sent to SIP? Or the court? If it is the court, I could just do this online?

[BankFodder]

The letter gets sent to SIP. The defence gets sent to the court

[buttered_toast2003]

I do have a name but I don't want to get anyone into trouble, as they always maintain that the car park is nothing to do with them and won;t get involved.

[BankFodder]

Well these are choices you will have to make.

 

Start writing your letters and defence. Nothing else we can do here until a hearing date is allocated

[buttered_toast2003]

I was in two minds about just paying and leaving it at that. I could really do without this right now, but that would be letting them win. Someone else had a similar situation to me over at MSE and their case was withdrawn by the PPC.

[BankFodder]

Well if you win, you can donate all of the money to us. We need funds very badly

[buttered_toast2003]

And if I don't?

[esmerobbo]

Have they identified the driver? April 2012 is pre POFA no keeper liability.

[buttered_toast2003]

Have they identified the driver? April 2012 is pre POFA no keeper liability.

They have not. No contact has ever been established

[ericsbrother]

As above, pre Oct 2012 only the driver may be pursued for any monies due so SIP are wrong in fact to chase you as the keeper of the vehicle without establishing whether you were the driver at th time and then they must claim aginst you as the DRIVER only.

You have picked up on the PoFA not being the relevant legislation so that should be a point that you emphasise. They are then open to a complaint to the DVLA for making false statements to get your details.

SIP are then stuck with claiming damages for breach of contract against an unknown person. You can deny that you are liable for that reason-ie you werent the driver so cannot have formed a contract.

The points you raise about signage are good ones as that would help you if the judge has it set in thier mind you were the driver as you can claim ignorance of any signage so not able to enter a contract by means of a lack of offer and consideration. There is case law on ignorance, look it up and quote the case. Ths should be part of a detailed defence entered once the allocation date is set, you defence for the moment is to deny claim in its entirety and a bare bones defence to get SIP to see the error of their ways.

Also, demand from SIP proof of the right by contract with the landowner that allows them to claim damages in their own name-will destroy any claim for damages for trespass. Likewise I bet their contract with gym doesnt go into enough detail about what rights are given over to SIP so having to produce said contract will make them think hard about continuing with their claim.

[buttered_toast2003]

Thanks all. I'm submitting my defence today - was rather busy yesterday. I've had a look on google maps and as I remembered there was NO signage AT ALL where the vehicle was parked - surely SIP can't ticket a vehicle where the motorist wouldn't realise it was a paid spot? You drive down the street and will only see the sign with T&Cs if you turn right onto the car park. If you were to drive straight ahead and park infront of the building you'd miss any signs totally. Surely they'd have to clearly signpost everything?

The number of cars I've seen parked outside the building that have been ticketed is unbelievable. Clearly people don't realise it's pay and display in that area!

[BankFodder]

It will help a lot to get photos - and get them now before any signage problems are corrected

[Surfer01]

Don't worry about being monitored by them. It doesn't matter. What have you got to hide. We only deal in truth here - and so does the court.

 

Please answer the questions.

 

Surely if the invoice was from before Oct 2012 it can safely be ignored and the correct advice was given at the time?

[esmerobbo]

Surely if the invoice was from before Oct 2012 it can safely be ignored and the correct advice was given at the time?

 

 

If you ignore a court claim they will simply ask for a default judgement!

[BankFodder]

Surely if the invoice was from before Oct 2012 it can safely be ignored and the correct advice was given at the time?

 

I have never thought that ignoring it was the right thing to do.