DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 70386--------------------------------------------------
G24 Claiming for PCN in Court
DIR By: GLC8
Date: May 7, 2025, 7:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi,
I am new to the forum (and not so computer savvy :'( ) and hope
someone can get help me with the following:
I was sent Contractual parking charge notice for parking in
private store car park for longer hours than permitted.
The permitted amount of time is 120 minutes and the car was
recorded there for 189 minutes.
The driver told me that on the road just outside the car park
there were works being done at the time and being rush hour
there was a complete standstill of cars queing in the car park
and there was no way out!
I sent this reply to G24 and they just sent me standard reply
ignoring my claims.
The adjudicator then gave the following decision:
Any reasons given by the Appellant for the overstay may amount
to mitigation, which the operator has duly considered. If the
operator felt that the mitigation warranted it, they could have
withdrawn the Parking Charge. They have chosen not to do so.
(I think this is not mitigation as one can not lock up someone
in a car park and then charge them)
Now I have received claim from HM Courts & Tribunals.
The questions are:
Is it correct that I do not have to pay
Do I have to prove the circumstances. It is far harder for me to
do this now that 6 months have passed. They did not ask for this
when I appealed to G24!
#Post#: 70415--------------------------------------------------
Re: G24 Claiming for PCN in Court
DIR By: JustLoveCars
Date: May 7, 2025, 9:36 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: GLC8 link ---
>
> Is it correct that I do not have to pay
>
--- End Quote ---
If you've received a court claim then you have a few options:
1) Pay it (in full)
2) Negotiate to pay a lower amount
3) Defend it
(The forum would lean towards 3, but effort is required)
--- Quote from: GLC8 link ---
>
> Do I have to prove the circumstances. It is far harder for me
to do this now that 6 months have passed. They did not ask for
this when I appealed to G24!
>
--- End Quote ---
Your Witness Statement (a statement of truth) can state that.
The parking company won't care as they just want the cash. The
situation on the road will be nothing to do with the parking
company - it may be difficult to get any 'evidence' to show the
work was ongoing.
The key plank of your (legal) defence will be a frustration of
contract. That is, you could not comply with the terms (to
leave on time) because of circumstances outside your control.
#Post#: 70422--------------------------------------------------
Re: G24 Claiming for PCN in Court
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: May 7, 2025, 10:45 am
---------------------------------------------------------
We will ideally need more information in order to provide sound
advice. Please read the following thread and provide as much of
the information it asks for as you are able to - READ THIS FIRST
- Private Parking Charges Forum guide
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/.<br
/>That thread also provides advice on using Imgur to upload any
images.
As a starting point it would be good to see:
- The original Parking Charge Notice
- A copy of the appeal you submitted
- A copy of the subsequent appeal to the independent appeals
service
- A copy of the claim form you have received
It would also be good to understand a little bit more about the
circumstances on the date in question. You mention that traffic
delayed their exit, but the overstay was 69 minutes. On the face
of it, that seems like an incredibly long time to be stuck in a
queue to leave a car park. Are you saying the driver was back in
their car before the 120 minutes expired, but then spent an hour
queueing to get out?
#Post#: 70536--------------------------------------------------
Re: G24 Claiming for PCN in Court
DIR By: GLC8
Date: May 8, 2025, 7:52 am
---------------------------------------------------------
APPEAL:
You completed the appeal on 01/10/2024
I wrote to the claimant that at the time of parking there were
works being done on the road outside parking lot. This created
an awful traffic jam WITHIN the car park where there was
literally no way to move for ages. In effect we were locked in
and are being given a pcn for that. The rules of parking do not
require me to fly out. I further wrote that can confirm with the
bank the TIME of transaction for shopping that was done at the
shopping centre there. They can easily check CCTV to prove my
point and also other people must have been charged. I was
shocked with their reply: they did not even read!! my appeal
just sent me a ready made template rejecting it!!
They should also explain what they will do about other people
who have received pcn at the same time
The operator made their Prima Facie Case on 08/10/2024
The operator reported that...
The appellant was the keeper.
The operator is seeking keeper liability in accordance with
PoFA..
ANPR/CCTV was used.
The Notice to Keeper was sent on 22/08/2024.
A response was received from the Notice to Keeper.
The ticket was issued on 22/08/2024.
The Notice to Keeper (ANPR) was sent in accordance with PoFA.
The charge is based in Contract.
The operator made the following comments...
This is not a relevant consideration as the motorist entered
into a contract with G24 Ltd, so have agreed to pay.
The signs advertising the terms and conditions of the car park
are compliant with our Approved Operator Scheme and displayed in
prominent locations throughout the car park.
The motorist entered into a contract with G24 Ltd to park within
the permitted free parking of 120 minutes and the motorist
parking period was for 189 minutes therefore the CPCN still
applies.
It is for the above reasons that the appeal was rejected.
The appellant made their response on 10/10/2024
The operator is suggesting that the legal contract requires me
to move my car without a physical ability to get out i.e. the
operator would be happy to lock the car park gates and then
charge the cars for not going out. It is the requirement of the
operator to ensure access and exit are POSSIBLE.
I further reiterate that the operator should cancel any other
claims made under the same circumstances
The adjudicator made their decision on 19/10/2024
The Appellant should understand that the Adjudicator is not in a
position to give legal advice to either of the parties but they
are entitled to seek their own independent legal advice. The
Adjudicator's role is to consider whether or not the parking
charge has a basis in law and was properly issued in the
circumstances of each individual case. In all Appeals the
Adjudicator is bound by the relevant law applicable at the time
and is only able to consider legal challenges and not factual
mistakes nor extenuating or mitigating circumstances. Throughout
this appeal the Operator has had the opportunity consider all
points raised and could have conceded the appeal at any stage.
The Adjudicator who deals with this Appeal is legally qualified
and each case is dealt with according to their understanding of
the law as it applies and the legal principles involved. A
decision by an Adjudicator is not legally binding on an
Appellant who is entitled to seek their own legal advice if they
so wish.
The signage at this site is prominent, clear and unequivocal in
its terms; there is a maximum stay allowed of 120 minutes.
The Appellant's vehicle was recorded as remaining on site for
189 minutes.
Any reasons given by the Appellant for the overstay may amount
to mitigation, which the operator has duly considered. If the
operator felt that the mitigation warranted it, they could have
withdrawn the Parking Charge. They have chosen not to do so.
As stated above, as adjudicator I am only able to consider legal
argument. The Appellant in this case has no legal argument.
Having considered all the relevant issues raised, I am satisfied
that the operator has established that the Parking Charge was
properly issued in accordance with the law.
This appeal therefore has to be dismissed.
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 70616--------------------------------------------------
Re: G24 Claiming for PCN in Court
DIR By: ixxy
Date: May 9, 2025, 2:21 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Over 70 minutes is a long time to be trapped in a car park under
the circumstances you describe. If you are going to rely on
frustration of contract which would be a valid defence you're
going to need to be able to back up that claim with evidence. It
would be interesting to know whether G24 saw an increase in PCNs
on that day, unfortunately they are not going to divulge that
sort of information to you. From their perspective if PCN
issuance was normal on the day the drivers claims won't seem
very credible. People get confused, exaggerate and downright lie
when they appeal so G24 is not going to take the (unknown)
driver's word for it.
#Post#: 70623--------------------------------------------------
Re: G24 Claiming for PCN in Court
DIR By: JustLoveCars
Date: May 9, 2025, 4:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: GLC8 link ---
>
> They can easily check CCTV to prove my point
>
--- End Quote ---
CCTV? There is unlikely to be any video.
The system operates by ANPR - this simply snaps entries and
exits (Without any context).
--- Quote from: GLC8 link ---
>
> The Appellant in this case has no legal argument.
>
--- End Quote ---
Er...
It's a sausage-machine. Computer says overstay, they want
paying regardless.
As already noted, there is a potential legal angle of
frustration. But 70 minutes is stretching credibility but isn't
impossible.
As this is a store car park, what did they say when approached?
Note that it's part of the process in issuing a claim - they may
back down if robustly defended. (It's the ultimate 'debt
collection' process that many will fold at as it appears
daunting)
#Post#: 70650--------------------------------------------------
Re: G24 Claiming for PCN in Court
DIR By: b789
Date: May 9, 2025, 5:52 am
---------------------------------------------------------
With an issue date of 29th April, you have until 4pm on Monday
19th May to submit your defence. If you submit an
Acknowledgement of Service (AoS) before then, you would then
have until 4pm on Monday 2nd June 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 G24 Ltd v [your full name] Claim no.:
[claim number]."
--- Quote ---
> [center]IN THE COUNTY COURT[/center]
> [right]Claim No: [Claim Number][/right]
>
> [center]BETWEEN:
>
> G24 Ltd
> 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. 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]
>
> 5. 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#: 70651--------------------------------------------------
Re: G24 Claiming for PCN in Court
DIR By: GLC8
Date: May 9, 2025, 5:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for all your replies!
The exact situation was that the driver (was not myself) tried
to exit the car park before the 2 hour deadline to drive to
another shopping centre round the corner. Having sat in the car
for probably 30 mins seeing the deadlock she gave up and walked
to the nearby shopping centre and returned later.
So in effect the car was locked in at the time needed to exit,
but she was able to remove it sometime before the 189 minute
exit time.
Questions are:
1) Was she required to stay there until she could exit.
2) Regarding evidence: I can probably find a member of staff of
one of the shops who remembers the fact that there was crazy
deadlock but they are unlikely to remember the date and time.
I do have bank statements showing purchases in the shop from
that shopping centre as well as the nearby shopping centre but
it does not show the time of the day to be able to prove
validate the facts. However as I pointed out if they would
have requested the evidence much earlier it would have been much
easier to get hold of, eg shop CCTV. But when I appealed the
charge they did not request it. Does that make any difference?
3) Maybe there is another line of defense? You are the experts!
Thanks!
#Post#: 70659--------------------------------------------------
Re: G24 Claiming for PCN in Court
DIR By: b789
Date: May 9, 2025, 6:13 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The only thing you need to concern yourself as the named
defendant is to do exactly what I have advised.
Everything else, for now, is irrelevant.
#Post#: 70674--------------------------------------------------
Re: G24 Claiming for PCN in Court
DIR By: GLC8
Date: May 9, 2025, 6:58 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Wow!!
Thanks!
Is the attachment all correct? (With alias)
[quote author=b789 link=topic=6231.msg70659#msg70659
date=1746789217]
The only thing you need to concern yourself as the named
defendant is to do exactly what I have advised.
You look like you have a sense of humour: I will not be guilty
of arguing with your instructions lest I fall into Twains trap
:)
[attachment deleted by admin]
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page