Capital Car Park/DCBL claimform - Chandlers Avenue, Barge Walk, Greenwich Peninsula SE10 0PE

[FTMDave]

Well done on filling in the sticky plus registering on MCOL and doing the AOS so quickly.

 

An immediate point in your favour is that they "should" be suing you for around £400 but have massively inflated the sum, and courts don't like that.

 

Where you've written "15/12/2018, 51585, 15/12/2018 51585" is it a typo, or have they really quoted the same PCN twice?

 

Can you give us some more details, as in what do these fleecers think you did wrong in that car park?

 

[FTMDave]

Thanks for posting the letters up.

 

Unfortunately they are only cut & paste letters from powerless DCAs.  We still don't know what Capital Car Park reckon you did wrong in "their" car park.  Bear with us.

 

However, to note for the future.  There's no-one on this site who hasn't made mistakes in legal disputes.  I for one had done many times and in particular regarding DCAs before I found the site.  The site is all about sharing info and empowering each other.  Chucking away letters when you are in legal dispute is not a good idea.  What is done is done but in future keep all correspondence when it could lead to legal action.

[FTMDave]

Great digging dx!

 

I had a look on Google Maps and there seemed to be Pay & Display places in the street.  If chinoky could go back and get pix of the signs that would help a lot.

 

Hilarious that they've sued for the same PCN twice.  Too bone idle to even check their roboclaims.  I'm sure the judge will be impressed (not!)

 

 

[FTMDave]

chinoky, the claimforms are standard, so we don't need to see yours, but could you type up the mathematics of how the crooks have made two PCNs (£200) + £50 legal costs + £25 filing fee ... somehow come to over £800?

 

Judges don't like this sort of thing, the PPC are taking the Michael and hope you don't know the law and will cough up, but when you do fight back invariably they get a right, good kicking in court.

[FTMDave]

I've seen some rubbish claim forms, but this one takes the biscuit.  No attempt at keeper liability, the same PCN included twice (!!!), massively inflated claim, etc.  They probably think they're being clever by going after you for £700+, doubt they'll be so smug once you defend and they realise a judge will be having a look at their tripe.

 

Next steps

   - draft a defence and post it up (if you look at the PPC Successes thread at the top of the page, there will be plenty of threads with "claimform" in the title)

   - get photos of the signage

   - dx reckons this is a bye-laws area, this definitely needs to be looked into.

 

 

 

 

[FTMDave]

13 hours ago, chinoky said:

my partner told me a car park but she meant parking bay.

 

By this do you mean you weren't driving that day, but your partner was?

 

Also BF has quite rightly pointed out the dangers of you being sued for over £600 and what to do were you to lose in court.

 

That said, these thickos have already done so many things wrong with their inflated claim that I can see a judge being very, very unimpressed by their abuse of the court procedure, and the odds of your losing are tiny.

 

This does of course depend on your putting the work in & building up a case against the crooks - and you're doing superbly so far 

[FTMDave]

1 hour ago, chinoky said:

The driver wasn't me that day and I am the keeper

 

Excellent news.  Yet another own goal from Capital.  If it actually gets to court you can point blank deny being the driver.  They're suing the wrong person, have been too lazy to use POFA to establish keeper liability and as BN said are now even deeper in the mire re the Unicorn Food Tax.

[FTMDave]

If you want to see how judges consider these inflated charges, and also have a good laugh at the PPCs' expense, have a read through the attachment in the first post at

 

 

[FTMDave]

Looks good to me.  Point 3 is very generic and covers just about everything, and that's the way to go, less is more for the time being.

 

This car park company will be in for the shock of their lives when you fight back, suing for the same ticket twice and all the Unicorn Food Tax will seriously rile a judge. 

[FTMDave]

An IT error!  More like being too bone idle to check what they'd written.

 

Unfortunately they have realised they had included the same ticket twice, and want the court to allow them to change their POC, and want you to agree to the change.

 

Obviously you need to tell them to Foxtrot Oscar, but I'm not sure how you would oppose their application to the court.  Hang on for the other regulars to look in, they have more experience than me with these "tricky" things.

 

BTW, did your partner park there three times?  

[FTMDave]

In their draft application to the court they state that their Letter of Claim listed the proper three invoices.  Is this true, or are they lying?

 

As for replying to them, hang fire for the moment, see what people who have dealt with this sort of thing before have to say, there may be a way to oppose their application or at least make them pay a hefty sum to the court for granting it.

[FTMDave]

Chinoky, I see you have reported a post. 

 

Simply write your questions here, and the regulars will be on soon to help out.

[FTMDave]

What happened regarding their application to have the Particulars of Claim amended?

 

As Brassnecked says, we don't normally suggest mediation.  There's nothing to mediate about.  You don't owe the money - end of.  Even worse, you are likely to let on to them how you intend to defend the case and play your cards too early.  However, if you want, post up your proposed bullet points and see what the regulars have to say.

Edited September 26, 2022 by FTMDave
Now-superfluous para deleted

[FTMDave]

When exactly is mediation fixed for?

[FTMDave]

Plus, can you look at MCOL and see if there is anything about them amending their POC?  I'm a bit bemused as to what has happened, it seems they were going to apply to the court but haven't done so.

[FTMDave]

As well as the PCNs, the Letter Before Action/Letter Before Claim would be useful too.

[FTMDave]

9 hours ago, Andyorch said:

Amendments to Particulars of claim does not show on MCOL...and I doubt very much they would make application with fee to amend.

 

10 hours ago, chinoky said:

I ignored their letters to change the PoC.

 

Excellent news.  So the thickos are left with a PoC where they are suing for Invoice A, invoice B, and, er, Invoice A again.

 

Well done on cancelling mediation.

[FTMDave]

It's not a fine chinoky, otherwise you would be in front of the Magistrates' Court.  The fleecers send out invoices with the same validity as any invoice from any private company.

 

So how much cash do they want?  £60 + £25 = £85?

 

Or (£60 x 2) + £25 = £145?

 

Or (£60 x 3) + £25 = £205?

[FTMDave]

Actually, it would just be easier please to upload the letter.

[FTMDave]

Any update on the Greenwich tickets?

 

I ask as we have someone new who is also being sued more than once for the same invoice.

[FTMDave]

Thank you so much for reporting back.

 

The fleecers in your case are in a terrible position having included the same invoice twice in their claim.  Presumably it's not worth their while to pay a hefty fee to the court to get the PoCs changed.

 

in this new case it's even worse - the PPC has included the same invoice five times!!!

 

However, after your Directions Questionnaire the court should have decided something.  Has there really been nothing from the court?