Parking Eye Court Claim

Coupon-mad

This is what I mean is missing, not even sure if there's a specified period of parking either? And it says 'either/or' as the contravention (not clear and not compliant)

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted

Right to claim unpaid parking charges from keeper of vehicle

4(1)The creditor has the right to recover any unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle.
(2)The right under this paragraph applies only if—
(a)the conditions specified in paragraphs 5, 6, 11...are met;


6(1)The second condition is that the creditor (or a person acting for or on behalf of the creditor)—
(b)has given a notice to keeper in accordance with paragraph 9


9(1)A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to keeper for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(b) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met.
(2)The notice must—
(a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;
(b) inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking and that the parking charges have not been paid in full;
(c) describe the parking charges due from the driver as at the end of that period, the circumstances in which the requirement to pay them arose (including the means by which the requirement was brought to the attention of drivers) and the other facts that made them payable;
(d) specify the total amount of those parking charges that are unpaid, as at a time which is—
(i)specified in the notice; and
(ii) no later than the end of the day before the day on which the notice is either sent by post...

bargepole

I'll endorse what C-M said in the two posts above, with a couple of caveats.


You don't 'ask' the LPC Law person anything, court protocol is that you only speak to the Judge. So you tell the Judge that PE have not complied with the conditions of POFA, for the reasons stated above, and it's then up to the Judge to ask for a response from the other side.


The inconsistency of small claims cases means that one Judge may regard all this as hugely significant, while another may dismiss it as completely irrelevant. If you get one of the latter, don't waste time and irritate the Judge by continuing to argue, move on to your next point.

Redx

this may seem daft as an idea but one thing I have noticed in regard to the comments above is that you see this if you watch Judge Rinder on itv which is on at the moment

yes I know its a telly program, but if you analyse what happens you will see he doesnt let the claimant or appellant interrupt each other, nor talk to each other, they have to speak directly to him (as bargepole says)

if they start to argue with him or each other they get a strike, they also get told when they are "not helping" in not following court protocols, so you would expect LPC LAW to be more conversant with this and the "defendant" to be more inclined to break these protocols, not helping themselves in doing so

I have also noticed they like people to stick to the point, answering the actual question posed and keeping emotion out of it as much as possible (difficult to do when you are involved but I am sure the calm and calculated approach works better)

so yes I know its a programme made for tv, but it seems to me its also like going to a car auction or house auction a few times before buying, its useful to see how things work, useful to see what upsets the judge or the case, not taking evidence is always a bad sign , not having it numbered or labelled or whatever is required at the time

and the good old adage of "god gave you 2 ears and 1 mouth for a reason" also seems to prevail

clearly the above advice by me wont win a case, but they say there is many a truth spoke in jest, and these tv cases seem to be about an MCOL (small claims) and I believe they follow the protocols for the most part that the replies above allude to, the programmes have certainly helped me to understand more of this process although you wont beat actually viewing live cases in person, of that I am sure

good luck

bargepole

Redx wrote: »

this may seem daft as an idea but one thing I have noticed in regard to the comments above is that you see this if you watch Judge Rinder on itv which is on at the moment ...

Not at all daft, the way they conduct the 'trial' in that programme follows the small claims procedure quite closely, and I would recommend anyone facing a court case to watch it.


Where it departs from a proper court is in the following:


1. In most courts, the claimant sits on the Judge's right and the defendant on the left, not the wrong way round they do it on TV.


2. The Judge does not wear any special robes, just ordinary clothes.


3. You don't address them as 'Judge', it's Sir or Madam.


4. There won't be an usher taking documents and passing them to the Judge, you're normally sitting close enough to pass them yourself. But in any case, everything submitted in the bundles should already be in the Judge's case file.


5. Generally, Judges won't make sarcastic comments about your appearance or lifestyle, or adopt camp Larry Grayson type facial gestures!

liseylou

Thank you CM, BM, BP and redx - all fantastic advice.

In regards to joining the cases, unfortunately, the court have said that the only way for 2 cases to be heard together is if for example, I have 2 claims against me by separate claimants and NOT 2 cases for different defendants.

As far as getting the case stayed is concerned, they said they would NOT pass this request to the judge prior to the hearing and suggested I ask him at an appropriate time on the day.

I suppose some courts stick by the book more than others. It's quite intimidating going in there being frisked by security as though you're just about to enter the USA.

Also, we both have different judges, which will be interesting to see their different working practices.

CM, I'll check my inbox now and thank you immensely as I appreciate how busy you are at the moment.

bargepole

liseylou wrote: »

Also, we both have different judges, which will be interesting to see their different working practices ...

That may not be true, you may have directions given by different judges, but they won't necessarily be hearing the cases on the day.


In a large court like Portsmouth, you may well find that there are half a dozen cases listed for the same start time, and three or four judges sitting. Your case will then be allocated to whichever judge becomes free first - some of the other cases may be all over in five minutes, others will take longer - and the judge will then spend 20 mins or so reading the papers before asking the usher to call you in.


So when a judge is allocated to your case, that will be the first time that they will see your request to stay the case.

liseylou

in reply to your private message coupon-mad, I was not driving as you can see in the photo PE sent me - I am in fact sat in the passenger seat!!

liseylou

This may sound stupid, but I don't want to turn up in court and get the judges back up straight away.

I've been watching Judge Rinder and have noticed that everyone wears black or grey. If I turn up in a grey suit dress with a purple jacket, will this be considered inappropriate or disrespectful attire? Or should I just stick to a black jacket? It's not a cheap suit and it looks very professional - it's my lucky outfit that I've worn at 3 job interviews and succeeded.

Coupon-mad

Stick with something smart/professional that you feel comfy in, now get to bed (hark at me who stays up till 2am on here)!

Break a leg, you and Mike. Try to at least grab a stay for the Beavis case if it looks like it's going pear shaped.

45mip19lot

Aaaaahhh.....I have just spent 30 minutes writing a post and the site crashed when I tried to post it