Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • caminch1993
    • By caminch1993 18th Jun 17, 7:00 PM
    • 40Posts
    • 3Thanks
    caminch1993
    County court claim for parking please help
    • #1
    • 18th Jun 17, 7:00 PM
    County court claim for parking please help 18th Jun 17 at 7:00 PM
    I wondered if any one can help me....

    i was renting a property that was patrolled by UKPC.
    i received numerous parking tickets, including ones on bank holidays such as new years day... I received tickets at 9,10,11pm which i didnt believe i had to pay! Now 18 months later i have received
    a claim form from SCS law for an amount that totals £1090.
    As i was about to pay this, my brother advised me of this thread and suggested posting a thread to see if anybody can help me or let me know how to go about either defending myself, or just paying the charge..... I have drafted an email in which i used one of you're templates......

    In the County Court Business Centre
    Between:
    UK PARKING CONTROLS
    V
    CAMERON INCH

    I, CAMERON INCH, deny I am liable to the Claimant for the entirety of the claim for each of the following reasons:


    1. This Claimant has not complied with pre-court protocol. And as an example as to why this prevents a full defence being filed at this time, a parking charge can be for trespass, breach of contract or a contractual charge. All these are treated differently in law and require a different defence. The wording of any contract will naturally be a key element in this matter, and a copy of the alleged contract has never been provided to the Defendant.

    (a) There was no compliant ‘Letter before County Court Claim’, under the Practice Direction.

    (b) This is a speculative serial litigant, issuing a large number of identical 'draft particulars'. The badly mail-merged documents contain very little information.

    (c) The Schedule of information is sparse of detailed information.

    (d) The Claim Form Particulars were extremely sparse and divulged no cause of action nor sufficient detail. The Defendant has no idea what the claim is about - what the alleged contract was; nothing that could be considered a fair exchange of information. The Claim Form Particulars did not contain any evidence of contravention or photographs.

    e) The Defence therefore asks the Court to strike out the claim as having no reasonable prospect of success as currently drafted.

    f) Alternatively, the Defendant asks that the Claimant is required to file Particulars which comply with Practice Directions and include at least the following information;

    i. Whether the matter is being brought for trespass, breach of contract or a contractual charge, and an explanation as to the exact nature of the charge

    ii. A copy of any contract it is alleged was in place (e.g. copies of signage)

    iii. How any contract was concluded (if by performance, then copies of signage maps in place at the time)

    iv. Whether keeper liability is being claimed, and if so copies of any Notice to Driver / Notice to Keeper

    v. Whether the Claimant is acting as Agent or Principal, together with a list of documents they will rely on in this matter

    vi. If charges over and above the initial charge are being claimed, the basis on which this is being claimed

    vii. If Interest charges are being claimed, the basis on which this is being claimed

    g) Once these Particulars have been filed, the Defendant asks for reasonable time to file another defence.

    2. The Claimant failed to meet the Notice to Keeper obligations of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Absent such a notice served within 14 days of the parking event and with fully compliant statutory wording, this Claimant is unable to hold me liable under the strict ‘keeper liability’ provisions.

    Schedule 4 also states that the only sum a keeper can be pursued for (if Schedule 4 is fully complied with, which it was not, and if there was a 'relevant obligation' and relevant contract' fairly and adequately communicated, which there was not) is the sum on the Notice to Keeper.

    3. This case can be distinguished from ParkingEye v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 (the Beavis case) which was dependent upon an undenied contract, formed by unusually prominent signage forming a clear offer and which turned on unique facts regarding the location and the interests of the landowner. Strict compliance with the BPA Code of Practice (CoP) was paramount and Mr Beavis was the driver who saw the signs and entered into a contract to pay £85 after exceeding a licence to park free. None of this applies in this material case.

    4. In the absence of any proof of adequate signage that contractually bound the Defendant then there can have been no contract and the Claimant has no case.
    a) The Claimant is put to strict proof that at the time of the alleged event they had both advertisement consent and the permission from the site owner to display the signs.
    b) In the absence of strict proof I submit that the Claimant was committing an offence by displaying their signs and therefore no contract could have been entered into between the driver and the Claimant.
    c) Inadequate signs incapable of binding the driver - this distinguishes this case from the Beavis case:
    (i) Sporadic and illegible (charge not prominent nor large lettering) of site/entrance signage - breach of the POFA 2012 Schedule 4 and the BPA Code of Practice and no contract formed to pay any clearly stated sum.
    (ii) Non existent ANPR 'data use' signage - breach of ICO rules and the BPA Code of Practice.
    (iii) It is believed the signage was not lit and any terms were not transparent or legible; this is an unfair contract, not agreed by the driver and contrary to the Consumer Rights Act 2015 in requiring a huge inflated sum as 'compensation' from by an authorised party using the premises as intended.
    (iv) No promise was made by the driver that could constitute consideration because there was no offer known nor accepted. No consideration flowed from the Claimant.
    (v) The signs are believed to have no mention of any debt collection additional charge, which cannot form part of any alleged contract.
    d) BPA CoP breaches - this distinguishes this case from the Beavis case:
    (i) the signs were not compliant in terms of the font size, lighting or positioning.
    (ii) the sum pursued exceeds £100.
    (iii) there is / was no compliant landowner contract.

    5. No standing - this distinguishes this case from the Beavis case:
    It is believed UKPC do not hold a legitimate contract at this car park. As an agent, the Claimant has no legal right to bring such a claim in their name which should be in the name of the landowner.

    6. The Beavis case confirmed the fact that, if it is a matter of trespass (not breach of any contract), a parking firm has no standing as a non-landowner to pursue even nominal damages.

    7. The charge is an unenforceable penalty based upon a lack of commercial justification. The Beavis case confirmed that the penalty rule is certainly engaged in any case of a private parking charge and was only disengaged due to the unique circumstances of that case, which do not resemble this claim.

    The Defendant denies any liability whatsoever to the Claimant in any matter and asks the Court to note that the Claimant has:

    (a) failed to disclose any cause of action in the incorrectly filed Claim Form issued on 12 June 2017

    (b) Sent a template, well-known to be generic cut and paste 'Particulars' of claim relying on irrelevant case law (Beavis) which ignores the fact that this Claimant cannot hold registered keepers liable in law, due to their own choice of non-POFA documentation.

    The vague Particulars of Claim disclose no clear cause of action. The court is invited to strike out the claim of its own volition as having no merit and no reasonable prospects of success.

    I confirm that the above facts and statements are true to the best of my knowledge and recollection.

    Signed
    Cameron Inch
    Date
    17/06/2017
Page 2
    • caminch1993
    • By caminch1993 29th Aug 17, 7:38 PM
    • 40 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    caminch1993
    Thnk u Coupon for your help! My case has been transferred to local court so am now just awaiting court date. its much appreciated. Please if you could stay on my thread and help me beat these!!
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 29th Aug 17, 8:33 PM
    • 1,144 Posts
    • 1,173 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    Coupon will stay, but you're expected to stay on top yourself.
    Get a witness statement together asap so we can fine tune it.
    • caminch1993
    • By caminch1993 3rd Oct 17, 8:14 PM
    • 40 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    caminch1993
    Hi guys, So my court Date is 7th December and my witness statement has to be in by 23rd november so plenty of time to hopefully put together a strong witness statement

    The documentation that i requested in my defence has still not been sent to me.
    No photos, no contract, no proof of signage ect, is this something i can use against them in my statement? As i did say that these are required for me to file my defence, and i am entitled to this information? Correct?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 3rd Oct 17, 10:56 PM
    • 51,709 Posts
    • 65,352 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Correct.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 4th Oct 17, 2:43 PM
    • 1,144 Posts
    • 1,173 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    You say the claimants deliberate refusal to cooperate, by not providing documentation or a proper explanation of their claim, has affected your ability to fully defend the case, as you have had to make assumptions as to what exactly the claimant is attempting to claim for.
    • caminch1993
    • By caminch1993 11th Nov 17, 3:58 PM
    • 40 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    caminch1993
    Hey guys,
    i have attached my witness statement draft, i feel like its missing meat as have not received any documents i asked for and was relying on to pull apart. , any advice or pointers will help.
    many Thanks




    In the matter of

    (Claimant)
    v
    (defendant)

    Claim no: D2HW7W11

    Witness statement of NAME and Address


    I am the Defendant in this matter, I am unrepresented, with no experience of Court procedures. If I do not set out documents in the way that the Claimant may do, I trust the Court will excuse my inexperience.
    In this Witness statement, the facts and matters stated are true and within my own knowledge, except where indicated otherwise.


    1. In the defendant’s original defence they asked the claimant to provide them with particulars of the claim that comply with Practice directions. The claimants deliberate refusal to cooperate, by not providing documentation or a proper explanation of their claim, has affected your ability to fully defend the case, as you have had to make assumptions as to what exactly the claimant is attempting to claim for. I am clearly entitled to this information under paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction. I also need it to comply with my own obligations under paragraph 6(b).

    2. The Defendant denies being entered into any contract between them and the claimant at the time of the supposed event. There was no offer to park.

    3. The defendant believes the signage on site does not comply with the BPA Approved Code of practice. There was no apparent entrance signs that can be seen clearly from a drivers view.
    The defendant believes that the signage on site is contradictive and unclear.

    4. The defendant believes there is no valid contract between the claimant and the landowner. The defendant therefore believes the claimant was committing an offence by displaying there signs.



    5. The defendant relies on their tenancy agreement to hold and enjoy the Property during the Tenancy without any unlawful interference by the Landlord or any person acting on his behalf. The aggressive business approach and unwarranted threat of court and debt collectors that has been issued to me from UKPC has caused me much distress and discomfort within this tenancy.

    6. The defendant also points out that there is no agreement within the tenancy agreement that states he must show a valid parking permit or pay a third party for no display of such.



    I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.



    Signed ....

    Dated 11/11/2017
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 11th Nov 17, 4:13 PM
    • 51,709 Posts
    • 65,352 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Change all the 'The Defendant' to 'I' because a WS should be in the first person.

    I think I would set out exactly what PCNs and what demands were received when, in this WS, and state how you responded and the dates when you wrote to ask for the evidence and photos, and the fact you received no reply.

    You can write this in non-legalese, in your own words.

    Your WS is also the time when you file your evidence (numbered pieces) and refer to it in your WS and file the whole folder - best by hand - with the court (and email a copy to Gladstones). So far your draft hasn't done this, has not mentioned your attached evidence, and it MUST do. Especially as you need to include your lease/tenancy or emails that came with the flat, that support your position, as you said:

    i was renting a property and UKPC issued numerous parking tickets, including ones on bank holidays such as new years day... I received tickets at 9,10,11pm
    This is the sort of thing to say, and suggest they acted vexatiously against residents. Explan why you didn't have a permit/what happened (assuming you are defending this one as admitted driver who parked (I can't recall! we do so many!)?
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • caminch1993
    • By caminch1993 11th Nov 17, 4:29 PM
    • 40 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    caminch1993
    Yes advice on this post was not to deny being driver,... Defence was was based on unclear signage and primacy of contract.. No permits were ever given to residents..

    ok just not many WS examples on here similar to my case. well not that i can find anyways!

    Thanks again CM
    • caminch1993
    • By caminch1993 11th Nov 17, 6:43 PM
    • 40 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    caminch1993
    How is this looking CM? anything key that i am missing?

    many thanks CM



    In the matter of

    UK Parking Control (Claimant)
    v
    (defendant)

    Claim no:

    Witness statement of Mr


    I am the Defendant in this matter, I am unrepresented, with no experience of Court procedures. If I do not set out documents in the way that the Claimant may do, I trust the Court will excuse my inexperience.
    In this Witness statement, the facts and matters stated are true and within my own knowledge, except where indicated otherwise.


    1. In my original defence I asked the claimant to provide me with particulars of the claim that comply with Practice directions. The claimants deliberate refusal to cooperate, by not providing documentation or a proper explanation of their claim, has affected my ability to fully defend the case, as i have had to make assumptions as to what exactly the claimant is attempting to claim for. I am clearly entitled to this information under paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction. I also need it to comply with my own obligations under paragraph 6(b).

    2. I call upon evidence Photo #1 which clearly states, “No unauthorised parking”. I therefore deny being entered into any contract between me and the claimant at the time of the supposed event. There was no offer to park and therefore no contract. Attached is evidence photo #1

    3. I, the defendant believes that the signage on site does not comply with the BPA Approved Code of practice. There are no apparent entrance signs that can be seen clearly from a driver view. Attached is photo #2 which is the entrance to St Michaels park, Bushey, from the driver’s position, in which there Is no Entrance signs. Attached is the BPA code of practice in which point B4.2 states that signs must be placed at the entrance to the site and inform a driver that the location is private land and managed by a BPA member.

    4. I believe that the signage on site is contradictive and unclear. Evidence photos #1,3,4,5 are all present on site, and all make contradictory offers. #1 suggests no parking allowed. #3 suggests No parking on double yellow lines. #4 suggests the area is for residents only. #5 Also suggests that parking is allowed for residents of St Michaels Park. I again refer to the BPA Code of practice which is attached. B4.5 states that all signs must be visible, clear and legible. Easy to see and read.

    5. B4.5 of the BPA code of practice also states, “You must clean and maintain signs regularly”. I refer to evidence photo #1 in which one of the claimant’s sign is visibly damaged and broken. Clearly UKPC are not adhering to the terms of the BPA Code of practice. The terms on this sign are unreadable, half the sign is missing and is clearly far to high for anybody to see! The actual height of this sign from ground level is XXX.

    6. Evidence photo #7 is the first photo seen from the driver when entering St Michaels park Bushey. Clearly this sign is dark, not lit and unreadable from ground level when dark. I would like to call upon the claim particulars to see the times of these tickets, but they have not been provided to me from the claimant as requested.


    7. Evidence photo #5. This sign displayed on site, clearly allows residents of St Michaels park to park. The presence of the claimant on the land will have supposedly been to prevent parking by uninvited persons, for the benefit of the actual leaseholders (MYSELF). Attached is my Tenancy agreement, which shows my residency at this estate. I feel like a predatory operation has been happening and affecting residents on this estate and the continued harassment and threats of bailiffs has very much affected my happiness and state of mind.


    8. I refer to Evidence photo #6 states, No parking at any time. I also refer to evidence photo #1 which states No parking between 7am and 11am. Again these signs are contradictive and confusing.

    9. The attached Tenancy agreement states “The Tenant may hold and enjoy the Property during the Tenancy without any unlawful interference by the Landlord or any person acting on his behalf.” I would like to remind the court of the Jopson V Homeguard case where it was found that a PPC cannot disregard the rights of residents.



    10. I relied on my tenancy agreement to hold and enjoy the Property during the Tenancy without any unlawful interference by the Landlord or any person acting on his behalf. The aggressive business approach and unwarranted threat of court and debt collectors that has been issued to me from UKPC has caused me much distress and discomfort within this tenancy.


    11. UKPC acted vexatiously against residents issuing PCN’s on bank holidays, including New year’s day!




    I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.



    Signed

    Dated 11/11/2017
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 11th Nov 17, 7:01 PM
    • 7,412 Posts
    • 6,459 Thanks
    The Deep
    Actually, Jopson mainly concerned loading and unloading, there are far better examples available, read some of these

    https://www.google.co.uk/search?source=hp&ei=ekgHWpHPFOLCgAa_ybiQAw&q=prima cy+of+contact+parking+prankster&oq=primacy+of+cont act+parking+prankster&gs_l=psy-ab.3..33i160k1.1841.18985.0.21477.36.36.0.0.0.0.48 8.4104.16j19j4-1.36.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..0.35.4011...0j0i131k1j0i22i30k1j0i13k1j33i22i2 9i30k1j33i21k1.0.lQSWwVgHJLU

    Are you aware of their previous?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3229165/Is-PROOF-private-parking-firms-scamming-motorists-Drivers-say-timings-photos-doctored-legally-parked-cars-issued-fines.html
    Last edited by The Deep; 11-11-2017 at 7:05 PM.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 11th Nov 17, 7:06 PM
    • 51,709 Posts
    • 65,352 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    The Deep, I disagree.

    Jopson is an important appeal decision, albeit not an authority or precedent but it IS persuasive on the lower courts where the facts are on all fours or similar.

    An appeal decision like Jopson trumps and is not 'bettered' by ordinary hearings at small claims level.


    @caminch that WS is much better! See what others say.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 11th Nov 17, 7:43 PM
    • 7,412 Posts
    • 6,459 Thanks
    The Deep
    CM, indeed, I was forgetting that it was an appeal.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • IamEmanresu
    • By IamEmanresu 12th Nov 17, 7:12 AM
    • 1,812 Posts
    • 3,202 Thanks
    IamEmanresu
    Have you been in contact with the Management Company about this and asked them to look into it as preying on residents appears outwith the remit that UKPC were given. See if you can get something on paper from them.

    https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/05096158
    Life's for living, get on with it rather than worrying about these. If they hassle, counter claim.

    Send them that costs schedule though, 24 hours before the hearing, and file it with the court. Take with you evidence that you have sent the costs schedule to them and when.
    LoC
    • caminch1993
    • By caminch1993 12th Nov 17, 10:40 AM
    • 40 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    caminch1993
    Is there anything you guys think i am missing from this?
    any evidence that you think i should include in this WS to help with my case?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 12th Nov 17, 4:57 PM
    • 51,709 Posts
    • 65,352 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Is there anything you guys think i am missing from this?
    any evidence that you think i should include in this WS to help with my case?
    Originally posted by caminch1993
    If you can get something in your favour from the MA, as IamEmanresu suggests, that would be extremely good and add weight to your defence.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Loadsofchildren123
    • By Loadsofchildren123 16th Nov 17, 12:06 AM
    • 1,754 Posts
    • 2,865 Thanks
    Loadsofchildren123
    Your statement should tell your story. Think of someone (like the judge) reading it for the first time. First of all you should set the scene. I think you need to start with explaining you are a tenant, and what rights to park were granted with your tenancy (so move 9/10 up) and then go on to say what happened on the dates in question. Then move onto signage etc.
    State the fact then refer to the exhibited document which evidences it.

    At the moment it isn't coming through clearly enough. It's all there but it needs a bit more thought.
    • caminch1993
    • By caminch1993 17th Nov 17, 8:00 PM
    • 40 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    caminch1993
    Thanks LoC.... How is this looking now??


    I am the Defendant in this matter, I am unrepresented, with no experience of Court procedures. If I do not set out documents in the way that the Claimant may do, I trust the Court will excuse my inexperience.
    In this Witness statement, the facts and matters stated are true and within my own knowledge, except where indicated otherwise.

    In my original defence I asked the claimant to provide me with particulars of the claim that comply with Practice directions which included, photographs, contracts, site maps, and details of the claim. The claimants deliberate refusal to cooperate, by not providing documentation or a proper explanation of their claim, has affected my ability to fully defend the case, as i have had to make assumptions as to what exactly the claimant is attempting to claim for. I am clearly entitled to this information under paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction and believe it is unreasonable behaviour not to provide me with such.

    I as the defendant deny I am liable for the entirety of this claim for the following reasons:

    1. As a resident of St Michaels Park, Bushey, there was never any written or verbal agreement within my shorthold tenancy agreement that I was to display a parking permit, pay for a ticket, or pay penalties to a private parking company for non-display of such. I note that Primacy of contract cannot be amended by Private parking company signs, unless I have agreed to a variation of the tenancy, which I have not.

    2. As a tenant, I relied on my Tenancy agreement to be able “to hold and enjoy the property during the tenancy without any unlawful interference by the landlord or any person acting on his behalf”. The aggressive approach and unwarranted threat of court and bailiff action from the claimant has caused me much stress and discomfort within this tenancy. Attached is Evidence file 10, my tenancy agreement.

    3. I would like to remind the court of the Jopson V Homeguard case where it was found that a PPC cannot disregard the rights of residents and the Link Parking V Ms P where it was found that the PPC could not override the rights to park by requiring a permit to park.

    4. I believe that the Claimant has acted in a predatory manner against residents whose very interest they would have been there to uphold. This has included issuing PCN’s on public bank holidays, including New Year’s Day. The claimant has targeted vulnerable residents whose right it was to park their vehicle at the premises.

    5. As a resident of St Michaels Park, Bushey, I believed that I was entitled to park on the site for the reasons above and also due to the signage on site. The signage on site clearly states, “Private road, Parking for Residents of St Michaels Park Bushey”. This sign clearly allows residents of St Michaels Park to park their vehicles on site. The presence of the claimant on the land will have supposedly been to prevent parking by uninvited persons, for the benefit of the leaseholders, which includes myself. I believe the claimant has been unreasonable in issuing these PCN’s to residents and forcing residents to part with their money through the constant harassment and threat of debt collectors.
    Page 2 of 3
    6. When trying to contact the claimant in regard to these PCN’s to explain residency at the address, I was only ever put through to a payment option on the phone. Solicitors letters followed, in which the same scenario. They are unreasonable and offer no option to get into contact with them. Then what follows is a constant bombardment of threats and demands from debt collection companies. I also note that I as the defendant never received a Letter before county court claim.

    7. I believe that the signage on site does not comply with the BPA Approved Code of practice. There are no apparent entrance signs that can be seen clearly from a driver view. Attached is photo #2 which is the entrance to St Michaels park, Bushey, from the driver’s position, in which there Is no Entrance signs. Attached is the BPA code of practice in which point B4.2 states that signs must be placed at the entrance to the site and inform a driver that the location is private land and managed by a BPA member.

    8. The signage on site is contradictive and unclear. Evidence photos #1,3,4,5 are all present on site, and all make contradictory offers. #1 suggests no parking allowed. #3 suggests No parking on double yellow lines. #4 suggests the area is for residents only. #5 Also suggests that parking is allowed for residents of St Michaels Park. I again refer to the BPA Code of practice which is attached. B4.5 states that all signs must be visible, clear and legible. Easy to see and read.

    9. Some of the claimant’s signs on site are visibly damaged and therefore the terms are unreadable. Clearly the claimant is not adhering to the terms of the BPA Code of Practice. B4.5 of the BPA code of practice also states, “You must clean and maintain signs regularly”. I refer to evidence photo #6 in which one of the claimant’s sign is visibly

    10. I also note that signs on this site are not lit, dark and unreadable from the ground when it is dark. Evidence photo #7I would like to call upon the claim particulars to see the times of these tickets, as clearly in winter months it is dark early at evenings, so signs would not be seen. As requested though, they have not been provided to me from the claimant as requested.

    11. One of the signs on site states, “No unauthorised parking”. I therefore deny ever being entered into any contract between me and the claimant at the time of the supposed event. There was no offer to park and therefore no contract was never proposed nor accepted. Attached is evidence photo #1

    12. Signs on this site are contradictive and confusing. B4.5 of the BPA Code of practice says that signs must be clear and legible. Signs on this site are definitely not clear about who is authorised to park and who is not. On one sign it states, No parking at any time. Another state No parking between 7am and 11am. Evidence photo’s #1 and #6 attached.

    13. 15.2 of The BPA Code of Practice states that “You must give clear information to the public about what parking activities are allowed and what is unauthorised.”
    Clearly the notices on this site do not give clear information as to what is allowed and what is deemed as unauthorised.

    14. 6.1 of the BPA Code of practice states “Under the Code, you must have the written authorisation of the landowner (or his appointed agent) before you can carry out parking control and enforcement work on the land in question”
    Such written authorisation has never been provided to myself as requested in my first defence, therefore I believe that UKPC do not hold a legitimate contract at these premises.


    Page 3 of 3
    I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 17th Nov 17, 8:57 PM
    • 51,709 Posts
    • 65,352 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    3. I would like to remind the court of the Jopson V Homeguard case where it was found that a PPC cannot disregard the rights of residents and the Link Parking V Ms P where it was found that the PPC could not override the rights to park by requiring a permit to park.
    You need to include those transcripts in evidence and refer to the evidence number.

    They are both hosted under the Parking Prankster's 'case law' or 'more case law' pages.

    And - remove 'PPC' every time. 'PPC' means NOTHING outside this forum and pepipoo, etc.!

    Call them the Claimant.

    Also only have 'PCN' once you have firstly put the full acronym, parking charge notice (PCN) to explain.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 17-11-2017 at 9:56 PM.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Johnersh
    • By Johnersh 17th Nov 17, 11:34 PM
    • 734 Posts
    • 1,361 Thanks
    Johnersh
    I still think it reads too much like another defence. It really ought to have a story feel to it.

    When investigating a new case, I obtain information by telling my clients that I'm going to stop asking questions - I then invite them to tell their story (I kid you not).

    Your statement should do exactly that. It is the fastest way the court will get to grips with the case, since the claimant papers will be scant and even your defence will contain some fairly standard provisions, given we use templates. The witness evidence from the claimant will add nothing new. I suggest reformatting as follows:

    1. Para about you and where you live
    2. Para confirming car owner
    3. Para confirming where you park the car on a day to day basis
    4. For own land parking details of ownership lease etc

    Subheading - parking ticket

    5. Describe location
    6. Describe date time. What you saw/did
    7. Describe ticket (and anything only apparent later on revisiting the site)


    Subheading - pre-action communications

    8. Details of correspondence with C or their agents and details of your enquiries
    9 detail of issues still outstanding/failed disclosure

    That sort of shape to it. There's no reason not to include the stuff you were going to include, but I'd definitely set out events first.
    Last edited by Johnersh; 17-11-2017 at 11:42 PM.
    • Johnersh
    • By Johnersh 17th Nov 17, 11:38 PM
    • 734 Posts
    • 1,361 Thanks
    Johnersh
    You have the option of serving a skeleton argument fine-tuning your "killer points" and court case references prior to the final hearing, so don't worry about trying to draft this as you think a lawyer might! Actually we like to keep witness statements quite simple, really.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

348Posts Today

1,456Users online

Martin's Twitter