DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 123178--------------------------------------------------
Re: Civil Enforcement Ltd. PCN - Payment not made / permit not
obtained - 1 Devon Street, L38HA
DIR By: KingJulien
Date: June 28, 2026, 6:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I am not editing the last post so that the attachments dont
disappear!
Is the below defence any better? Am I still risking identifying
myself as the driver?
Defence
1. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to the
relief claimed, or to any relief at all.
2. The Particulars of Claim are sparse and fail to plead the
Claimant's case with sufficient particularity. They do not
identify the contractual terms relied upon, how they were
allegedly accepted, nor the legal basis upon which the Defendant
is said to be liable. The Defendant is therefore unable to plead
to matters which have not been properly particularised and the
Claimant is put to strict proof of every element of its claim.
3. It is admitted only that the Defendant is the registered
keeper of the vehicle referred to in the Particulars of Claim.
Save as expressly admitted, the allegations are denied.
4. The Claimant alleges that the parking charge arose because
"Payment not made / permit not obtained in accordance with
notified terms". The Defendant denies that any enforceable
contractual liability arose.
5. The signage at the location prominently advertised "Phone and
Pay Public Parking" together with parking tariffs. The
restriction upon which the Claimant now relies was not given
equivalent prominence. Taken as a whole, the signage was capable
of conveying to a reasonable motorist that parking was available
through the advertised payment system.
6. The Defendant is in possession of contemporaneous records
demonstrating that, on the day before the alleged parking event,
the Claimant's nominated payment system generated a completed
parking receipt for the same location, vehicle registration and
location code showing a parking charge of £0.00. The Defendant
also possesses receipts showing that, on other occasions at the
same location, parking charges were successfully paid where
payment was required.
7. Those records are consistent with the payment system
presenting differing charging arrangements depending upon the
circumstances and demonstrate that the Defendant had every
reason to understand that the advertised payment system was the
correct means of complying with the parking terms.
8. The Defendant subsequently revisited the location and
observed that, prior to the Claimant changing parking providers,
the same location code continued to present a parking session
with a parking charge of £0.00. The Defendant does not know why
the Claimant's chosen payment system produced that result. That
is a matter within the Claimant's knowledge. If the Claimant's
case is that no parking could be purchased during the relevant
period, it is put to strict proof that its payment system
clearly communicated that fact to motorists using the payment
method advertised on its own signage.
9. Following receipt of the Parking Charge Notice, the Defendant
attended the premises and was directed by a retailer to the
building reception. A member of reception staff took the
Defendant's details and stated that the Parking Charge Notice
would be cancelled. Upon later receiving further correspondence
from the Claimant, the Defendant returned to the premises and
was informed by the reception manager that the cancellation had
not been processed and that it was then too late to do so. The
Defendant will give evidence of those events.
10. The Claimant is put to strict proof that:
(a) the signage adequately communicated the contractual terms
relied upon;
(b) the payment system clearly informed motorists when parking
was unavailable or that a permit was required;
(c) the Claimant had authority from the landowner to enter
contracts and pursue this claim.
11. This matter is readily distinguishable from *ParkingEye Ltd
v Beavis* [2015] UKSC 67. The issues in this case concern the
adequacy of the contractual notice, the operation of the
Claimant's chosen payment system, and whether any contractual
obligation was clearly communicated to motorists.
12. In the circumstances, the Defendant denies that the Claimant
has established any entitlement to the sum claimed and
respectfully invites the Court to dismiss the claim.
#Post#: 123185--------------------------------------------------
Re: Civil Enforcement Ltd. PCN - Payment not made / permit not
obtained - 1 Devon Street, L38HA
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: June 28, 2026, 7:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
In the first instance I would keep the defence super-simple
purely because they are not pleading keeper liability.
Something like;
1. That liability for the alleged debt is denied and that no
money is owed by myself to the Claimant.
2. That the Particulars of Claim (POC) are so sparse that I can
only submit what is regarded as a skeleton defence based on the
Claimant's pleaded claim.
3. That it is acknowledged that I was the Keeper of the vehicle
in question at the material time.
4. That the vehicle driver is not known by the Claimant and the
Claimant has provided no evidence as to who was driving at the
material time when they allege the contract / breach occurred.
5. That there is no legal obligation for a vehicle keeper to
provide driver details to an unregulated private parking
contractor and I will not be providing such information under
any circumstance.
6. That, in law, the Claimant cannot automatically assume that
the registered keeper was the driver on any given occasion.
7. That the Claimant has not pleaded any alternative to driver
liability in their POC and, as such, they are put to strict
proof to demonstrate who was driving at the material time.
8. That with the driver unknown and, no alterative pleaded
liability, I deny that any money is owned by myself to the
Claimant.
#Post#: 123225--------------------------------------------------
Re: Civil Enforcement Ltd. PCN - Payment not made / permit not
obtained - 1 Devon Street, L38HA
DIR By: KingJulien
Date: June 28, 2026, 2:41 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you InterCity125! I have changed my defence based on your
input.
Should I remove point 10 and 11? Will it be an issue if I do not
include it now, but do so in a witness statement at a later
stage?
--- Quote ---
>
> **DEFENCE**
>
> 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 fails
adequately to disclose a cause of action against the Defendant.
>
> 2. The Particulars of Claim ("PoC") are sparse and fail to
plead the Claimant's case with sufficient particularity.
Accordingly, the Defendant is only able to file a skeleton
Defence addressing the matters presently pleaded.
>
> 3. It is admitted only that the Defendant was the registered
keeper of the vehicle referred to in the Particulars of Claim at
the material time.
>
> 4. The Claimant has not pleaded whether the Defendant is
pursued as the driver, the registered keeper, or on any other
legal basis.
>
> 5. Although the Notice to Keeper referred to Schedule 4 of the
Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, the Claimant has not pleaded
any reliance upon Schedule 4 in the Particulars of Claim, nor
pleaded the facts necessary to establish keeper liability. The
Particulars of Claim do not identify the driver or explain the
legal basis upon which the Defendant, as registered keeper, is
alleged to be liable.
>
> 6. There is no legal obligation upon the registered keeper of
a vehicle to identify the driver to a private parking operator,
and the Defendant declines to do so.
>
> 7. There is no legal presumption that the registered keeper of
a vehicle was its driver on any particular occasion.
>
> 8. The Claimant has chosen not to plead any alternative basis
of liability. In the absence of any pleaded basis upon which the
Defendant, as registered keeper, may be held liable, and in the
absence of any pleaded facts identifying the Defendant as the
driver, the Claimant is put to strict proof that the Defendant
is liable for the alleged contractual breach.
>
> 9. Accordingly, the Defendant denies that any liability to the
Claimant has been established and denies that any sum is owed.
>
> 10. Upon becoming aware of the PCN, the Defendant notified the
shop and the building owner, who recorded the PCN details and
confirmed they would arrange for its cancellation. The Defendant
reasonably relied on that assurance. Following receipt of the
Letter Before Claim, the Defendant was informed that the
cancellation had not been processed and was incorrectly told the
cancellation period had expired.
>
> 11. The Defendant's position is that the Claimant's signage
and payment arrangements did not clearly communicate the
restriction now relied upon. The Defendant possesses
contemporaneous documentary evidence relating to the operation
of the Claimant's nominated payment system at the location and
will rely upon that evidence, together with evidence relating to
the site signage, at the appropriate stage of these proceedings.
>
> 12. The Defendant respectfully invites the Court to dismiss
the claim.
>
--- End Quote ---
With regards do a draft order should I just use the template
draft order, or do I need to add anything mentioning reasonable
grounds within CPR 3.4(2)(a)(ChatGPT advises so ::) )?
Should I use the short draft order on the one in the link below?
HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/o1xbmqxzmgn4dv9el96kd/Draft-Order.pdf?rlkey=td1ajprejse2mgq6z9x0fgahr&st=byvlkosl&dl=0
--- Quote ---
>
> DRAFT ORDER
> Of the Court's own initiative and upon reading the particulars
of claim and the defence.
>
> AND the court being of the view that the particulars of claim
do not comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a) because (a) they do not set
out the exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms
and conditions of the contract (or contracts) which is (or are)
relied on and (b) they do not adequately set out the reason (or
reasons) why the claimant asserts that the defendant was in
breach of contract.
>
> AND the claimant could have complied with CPR 16.4(1)(a) had
it served separate detailed particulars of claim [as it could
have done pursuant to CPR PD7C.5.2(2) but it chose not to do
that.
>
> AND upon the claim being for a very modest sum such that the
court considers it disproportionate and not in accordance with
the overriding objective to allot to this case any further share
of the court resources by ordering further particulars of claim
and a further defence each of which will be followed further
referrals to the judge for case management.
>
> Order
> 1. The claim is struck out.
> 2. Permission to either party to apply to set aside, vary or
stay this order by
> an application on notice which must be filed at this Court not
more than 5
> days after service of this order, failing which no such
application may be
> made.
>
--- End Quote ---
Edit: Sorry, I forgot to add the defence regarding the building
owner and cancellation, I’ll update the defence shortly to
include that.
Edit: I have added this now! Thanks jfollows! :)
#Post#: 123231--------------------------------------------------
Re: Civil Enforcement Ltd. PCN - Payment not made / permit not
obtained - 1 Devon Street, L38HA
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: June 28, 2026, 3:26 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I would finish at point 9.
Leave 10, 11 and 12 out for the moment.
#Post#: 123245--------------------------------------------------
Re: Civil Enforcement Ltd. PCN - Payment not made / permit not
obtained - 1 Devon Street, L38HA
DIR By: KingJulien
Date: June 28, 2026, 5:50 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks InterCity125! You've been a huge help and I have learned
a lot!
I removed 'and the Defendant declines to do so' from 6, and
paras 10-12 and submitted the defence without the draft order
HTML https://emoji.tapatalk-cdn.com/emoji106.png
#Post#: 124549--------------------------------------------------
Re: Civil Enforcement Ltd. PCN - Payment not made / permit not
obtained - 1 Devon Street, L38HA
DIR By: KingJulien
Date: July 13, 2026, 1:22 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I have received an email from the Claims manager with a generic
witness statement, but I have not received the copy from CNBC
yet.
Their email states 'We reserve the right to file and serve a
supplementary or updated witness statement prior to the hearing,
should it become necessary.'
Do I need to do anything at this stage at all?
#Post#: 124551--------------------------------------------------
Re: Civil Enforcement Ltd. PCN - Payment not made / permit not
obtained - 1 Devon Street, L38HA
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: July 13, 2026, 1:32 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
We can't advise on a witness statement we haven't seen. Please
show us.
#Post#: 124552--------------------------------------------------
Re: Civil Enforcement Ltd. PCN - Payment not made / permit not
obtained - 1 Devon Street, L38HA
DIR By: KingJulien
Date: July 13, 2026, 1:42 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Please see the attached witness statement.
HTML https://i.ibb.co/Dy7Zr4L/WS-pages-to-jpg-0002.jpg
HTML https://i.ibb.co/LFg2Ms0/WS-pages-to-jpg-0003.jpg
HTML https://i.ibb.co/PsWzRzDs/WS-pages-to-jpg-0004.jpg
HTML https://i.ibb.co/zTNnt3JN/WS-pages-to-jpg-0005.jpg
HTML https://i.ibb.co/mVcn5dpg/WS-pages-to-jpg-0006.jpg
HTML https://i.ibb.co/Df9nmrgT/WS-pages-to-jpg-0007.jpg
HTML https://i.ibb.co/M5y096VQ/WS-pages-to-jpg-0008.jpg
HTML https://i.ibb.co/20cZ8YJp/WS-pages-to-jpg-0009.jpg
HTML https://i.ibb.co/vxBR3BD0/WS-pages-to-jpg-0010.jpg
#Post#: 124555--------------------------------------------------
Re: Civil Enforcement Ltd. PCN - Payment not made / permit not
obtained - 1 Devon Street, L38HA
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: July 13, 2026, 2:38 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Oh
So basically they've introduced PoFA liability but it wasn't on
the Claim Form.
When does your Witness Statement need to be submitted?
#Post#: 124789--------------------------------------------------
Re: Civil Enforcement Ltd. PCN - Payment not made / permit not
obtained - 1 Devon Street, L38HA
DIR By: KingJulien
Date: July 15, 2026, 8:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
This came through from CEL directly as an email and I
haven’t received anything from CNBC yet. So I do not have
a deadline for the witness statement yet, but I have started
working on it.
*****************************************************
Page 3 of 4
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page