In court with Parking Eye soon - what to do?

Tifoso

Hi All,

I would really appreciate some urgent advice on what I should do now that Beavis has lost.

My court date was postponed until the outcome of Beavis, but was booked again after the outcome.

My case was very similar to Beavis all along.
- I was parked without paying. Photographic proof.
- I challenged on the basis that the penalty was unreasonable (all of the recommended approaches pre-Beavis using template letters).

However surely I'm stuffed now?!

1) Could I offer to settle beforehand?
2) Should I?
3) What new defences are recommended post-Beavis?
4) Is there any way to withdraw since my decision to appeal was made pre-Beavis? I wouldn't challenge now based on that decision.

If anyone could offer some friendly advice I'd be ever so grateful. This is all getting rather stressful.

Cygnus_Alpha

Did you challenge on the other points eg signage and their standing to bring a claim etc. Those are unaffected by Beavis.

Also, how similar is your case to Beavis? For example, Beavis parked in a "free" car park. Was your car park "free" or was there an hourly charge?

I won in court against PE about a year ago on signage. Their sign was behind a tree branch and there was no sign at the entrance.

Half_way

How soon is soon? there's a parking prankster book on amazon, also in who's car park was this? if you can get the landowner to confirm that they do not wish this to go to court then that would be of great use.

Also irrespective on how things turn out you should be looking into some publicity if the landowner who took on parking eye doesn't co-operate, a nice little campaign warning motorists not to enter or even let wheel anywhere near the place

Marktheshark

You might as well fight, prepare a good broad defence using the guides.
Even if they win, you win, pay in 14 days and no ccj is registered and they LOSE MONEY as they have to pay a solicitor £350 which they can not get back.

Coupon-mad

My case was very similar to Beavis all along.
- I was parked without paying. Photographic proof.

Those 2 sentences contradict each other. Beavis wasn't about pay and display which is a simple financial contract situation revolving around a set tariff of a few quid.

UNLIKE BEAVIS WHICH WAS ABOUT OFFSETTING £85 AGAINST THE BENEFIT OF A VALUABLE LICENCE GRANTED FOR 2 HOURS FREE PARKING.

Look how salmosalaris explains the difference:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/69931055#Comment_69931055

So...was your situation like the Beavis case after all?

But more to the point, show us what your INITIAL defence said, urgently, and when you have to get your full defence in, before the hearing (how long do you have)?

Tifoso

Hi All,

Thank you so much for your responses.

- Apologies, my case is a bit different from Beavis then. It was in a hospital car park in London for which payment was required.
- Signage was sufficient at this car park, so I will not be able to use that arguement.
- If I lose in court, what am I likely to have to fork out? And is it true that if I pay up within 14 days I don't get a CCJ? Do I not have to pay their legal expenses too?
- I am in court next Wednesday. I will post my initial defence here when I get home.

Thanks again for all the advice.

Redx

but does or did the signage meet the BPA CoP , it often does not, so is one point

locus standii is another legal point (no contract)

if its a p & d car park owned by the trust that is different to Beavis

typical court costs are around £200 if you lose, including expenses

you have 28 days to pay the judgment and avoid a CCJ

you can claim up to £90 expenses if you win, so need to get your costs written down so you can ask for them to be paid if you win whilst with the judge

and read the parking prankster PE COURT book too

Coupon-mad

- Signage was sufficient at this car park, so I will not be able to use that argument.

Wrong - unless you didn't criticise the signs in your defence at first. You can't add new points, can only expand on what you had submitted earlier. Signs are never sufficient - there were even areas of the car park in the Beavis case that were not adequately signed but unfortunately this wasn't argued at the time. Never admit that 'signage was sufficient'. It's for the Claimant to prove that. The fact ''there are signs up'' (which of course there have to be...) is not the same as you agreeing to a VERY CLEAR and in-your-face contract to pay PE £100, or whatever sum. Bet you didn't have a clue.

- I am in court next Wednesday. I will post my initial defence here when I get home.

So you HAVE submitted your full defence to the Court and PE already, in January then, in accordance with the instructions from the court when the court date came through. So there is nothing we can add, your defence is in I hope, or you'll lose.

What points did you have?