How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Jo C. Your Own Question
Jo C.
Jo C., Barrister
Category: Traffic Law
Satisfied Customers: 71057
Experience:  Over 5 years in practice.
Type Your Traffic Law Question Here...
Jo C. is online now

Further to an earlier question: a private land parking company

Resolved Question:

Further to an earlier question: a private land parking company are taking me to court and are using PoFA (protection of freedoms act) to peruse me as the registered keeper. (this is the act that they have named on the court claim form) I have not named the driver.
The alleged breach of contract took place in a port car park, which is subject to bye-laws. The PoFA act specifically states that the right to peruse to the registered keeper (the act itself) does not apply on land covered by Bye-laws. The car park operator know that this is the case and has issued on this basis anyway.
How would a judge view this?
Submitted: 3 years ago.
Category: Traffic Law
Expert:  Jo C. replied 3 years ago.
Thank you for your question. My name is ***** ***** I will try to help with this.
Do they rely on the PoFA?
Customer: replied 3 years ago.
Yes, that is what they are basing the claim on.
Expert:  Jo C. replied 3 years ago.
What have they actually said on that point?
Customer: replied 3 years ago.
Well, they have recently issued a large pile of documents as part of their notice to proceed.
But on the claim form they have stated that they are pursing the Registered Keeper under PoFA.
Expert:  Jo C. replied 3 years ago.
Yes, and that is wrong but it doesn't void the claim necessarily.
Before the PoFA there was case law that suggested that the registered keeper was likely to be the driver unless he named another. That presumption is obviously weaker than the statutory presumption under the PoFA but it can still be relied upon.
This will depend really on how annoyed the Judge is with them for relying on the PoFA. If he is of the view that they are misbehaving then he may quash it on that basis. If not, then he may supplant the old caselaw.
In truth, it will depend whether the Judge even finds the old caselaw. The small claims court is very DIY. Bad decisions are quite often made.
Can I clarify anything for you?
Jo C. and other Traffic Law Specialists are ready to help you