DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 68727--------------------------------------------------
Total Parking B&Q carpark ticket ignored now court claim
DIR By: EHRob
Date: April 26, 2025, 2:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Dear experts,
In September last year, the driver of the car for which I am the
registered keeper, parked in the B&Q carpark at Cricklewood,
London, made a purchase, and then nipped off to get some fast
food before departing. They had no idea this would result in a
ticket for 'leaving the site whilst vehicle was parked on the
premises' - had not spotted any text to this effect. So when I
received a ticket from a private company 'Total Parking
Solutions' I ignored what I understood to be an invoice, and the
subsequent threats and demands.
I have now received a letter from HM Courts & Tribunals
informing me that TPS are making a claim against me for £262.28
and rising. See this letter:
HTML https://ibb.co/p6QQnB60
What should I do? Is there any way of getting out of this? From
memory I think they say there is camera footage of the driver
leaving the site. Can I argue that the driver had not agreed to
their terms as they hadn't seen the small print on the signage?
Your advice greatly appreciated.
Best, EHR
#Post#: 68736--------------------------------------------------
Re: Total Parking B&Q carpark ticket ignored now court claim
DIR By: Sander333
Date: April 26, 2025, 3:43 am
---------------------------------------------------------
This needs to be looked at by those who have vast experience but
I think you need to remove the I parked etc. This may cause all
sorts of issue bad advice to ignore any PCN from a private
Parking company hopefully you have kept any information for it
to be uploaded. There are a number of cases which have been
resolved by the leaving car park area.
I would imagine that the court papers need to be dealt with
expeditiously
#Post#: 68737--------------------------------------------------
Re: Total Parking B&Q carpark ticket ignored now court claim
DIR By: EHRob
Date: April 26, 2025, 3:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi Sander333, don't fully understand so have dm'd you.
#Post#: 68751--------------------------------------------------
Re: Total Parking B&Q carpark ticket ignored now court claim
DIR By: RichardW
Date: April 26, 2025, 4:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Have a look at any of the recent posts about court cases, the
POC are the usual rubbish from DCBL, so the std defence b789 has
posted many times should be applicable. Be aware of deadlines!
#Post#: 68752--------------------------------------------------
Re: Total Parking B&Q carpark ticket ignored now court claim
DIR By: EHRob
Date: April 26, 2025, 4:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks RichardW - no hadn't seen, I'm wading through posts
trying to find the relevant info - searching b789 doesn't get me
anywhere. Could you suggest or post or a link to one with the
right info?
Best, EHR
#Post#: 68757--------------------------------------------------
Re: Total Parking B&Q carpark ticket ignored now court claim
DIR By: jfollows
Date: April 26, 2025, 5:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
See
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/
The driver of the car for which you are the registered keeper
parked, for example, not what you wrote.
#Post#: 68758--------------------------------------------------
Re: Total Parking B&Q carpark ticket ignored now court claim
DIR By: jfollows
Date: April 26, 2025, 5:13 am
---------------------------------------------------------
But “leaving the site” is nonsense and unenforceable for many
reasons. There are cases here with advice if you search.
Just put “leaving” in the search box, for example.
#Post#: 68764--------------------------------------------------
Re: Total Parking B&Q carpark ticket ignored now court claim
DIR By: EHRob
Date: April 26, 2025, 5:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Ah thanks, have modified text.
Relief to know it's unenforceable!
Would be great to have a link to a relevant case as so far I
have found ones that are similar but not quite the same so
worried I will mess up
#Post#: 68785--------------------------------------------------
Re: Total Parking B&Q carpark ticket ignored now court claim
DIR By: b789
Date: April 26, 2025, 7:21 am
---------------------------------------------------------
These "leaving the site" cases are known as "toothbrush claims"
because the last time, many years ago, that someone tried to
make a claim like this, the judge was so incensed with the
claimants representative due to the absurdity and lack of
evidence that he held him in contempt of court and threatened
the rep that the next time he tried to bring such a case before
him, he'd better bring a toothbrush as he'd be spending some
time in custody for contempt.
What evidence has TPS provided to back up their claim? Anyway,
easy to deal with...
With an issue date of 22nd April you have until 4pm on Monday
12th May to submit your defence. If you submit an
Acknowledgement of Service (AoS) before then, you would then
have until 4pm on Tuesday 27th May to submit your defence.
If you want to submit an AoS then follow the instructions in
this linked PDF:
HTML https://www.dropbox.com/s/xvqu3bask5m0zir/money-claim-online-How-to-Acknowledge.pdf?dl=0
Otherwise, here is the defence and link to the draft order that
goes with it. You only need to edit your name and the claim
number. You sign the defence by typing your full name for the
signature and date it. There is nothing to edit in the draft
order.
When you're ready you combine both documents as a single PDF
attachment and send as an attachment in an email to
claimresponses.cnbc@justice.gov.uk and CC in yourself. The claim
number must be in the email subject field and in the body of the
email just put: "Please find attached the defence and draft
order in the matter of [claimant] v [your full name] Claim no.:
[claim number]."
--- Quote ---
> [center]IN THE COUNTY COURT[/center]
> [right]Claim No: [Claim Number][/right]
>
> [center]BETWEEN:
>
> [Claimant]
> Claimant
>
> - and -
>
> [Defendant's Full Name]
> 
Defendant
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------
>
> DEFENCE[/center]
>
> 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 comply with CPR
16.4.
>
> 3. The Defendant is unable to plead properly to the PoC
because:
>
> [indent](a) The contract referred to is not detailed or
attached to the PoC in accordance with CPR PD 16(7.5);
>
> (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.[/indent]
>
> 4. In any event, the allegation that a driver 'left the site'
while a vehicle remained parked does not, of itself, constitute
a breach of contract. No contractual term is pleaded, nor is its
incorporation or enforceability explained. The claim is
speculative, incoherent, and discloses no reasonable cause of
action.
>
> 5. The Defendant attaches to this defence a copy of a draft
order approved by a district judge at another court. The court
struck out the claim of its own initiative after determining
that the Particulars of Claim failed to comply with CPR 16.4.
The judge noted that the claimant had failed to:
>
> [indent](i) Set out the exact wording of the clause (or
clauses) of the terms and conditions relied upon;
>
> (ii) Adequately explain the reasons why the defendant was
allegedly in breach of contract;
>
> (iii) Provide separate, detailed Particulars of Claim as
permitted under CPR PD 7C.5.2(2).
>
> (iv) The court further observed that, given the modest sum
claimed, requiring further case management steps would be
disproportionate and contrary to the overriding objective.
Accordingly, the judge struck out the claim outright rather than
permitting an amendment.[/indent]
>
> 6. 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 for the Claimant’s failure to comply with
CPR 16.4.
>
> Statement of truth
>
> I believe that the facts stated in this Defence 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.
>
> Signed:
>
>
> Date:
--- End Quote ---
Draft Order for the defence
HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/tcewefk7daozuje25chkl/Strikeout-order-v2.pdf?rlkey=wxnymo8mwcma2jj8xihjm7pdx&st=nbtf0cn6&dl=0
#Post#: 68827--------------------------------------------------
Re: Total Parking B&Q carpark ticket ignored now court claim
DIR By: EHRob
Date: April 26, 2025, 11:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you so much for such a detailed response b789. So helpful,
and love the toothbrush detail.
I am afraid I don't remember what evidence they had, it's
possible it was CCTV footage, but maybe just a claim that they
had it. I will have a thorough search to see if I kept any
copies of the original ticket.
Will get submitting asap. Huge thanks :)
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 4
DIR Next Page