Calder Park, Wakefield PCN

l12345

Great thanks!
I'll make these changes now

l12345

Is this good enough to be submitted?

Statement of Defence

1) I am ???????, defendant in this matter.

2) I strongly object to the offence of “no stopping” at Calder Park, Wakefield on 04/12/2015. The vehicle in question was a white Peugeot Partner company vehicle registration number ???? ???. This in turn resulted in the issue of a parking charge notice by the claimant.

3) I deny any liability in respect of the claim.

4) The IAS has dismissed my appeal which I feel is unfair as it was the company secretary who wrote my initial IAS appeal while I was working nights in Scotland. I explained what happened over the phone and she filled out the form but missed out vital information. Simply stating that I was ill.

5) My version of the event:

On the day of the “offence” I felt I needed to stop for a break as I had been feeling unwell throughout the morning. I decided to pull into Calder Park and have a break at the BP service station. I feel that the signs were not visible enough for me to read and fully understand in a moving vehicle as I entered Calder Park due to them being positioned on the busy roundabout and on the opposite side of the road. Once I had finished at BP I exited the car park but there was a caravan parked across the road which obstructed my view of the “No Stopping” directly in front of the junction. I turned left and continued down the road, stopping for a matter of seconds. As my vehicle was now stationary (with my foot still on the brakes) I could read the sign to the best of my ability. I found this quite a hard task from inside my vehicle as the sign was very cluttered with different symbols and a multitude of words of varying text sizes, including a lot of small print.

6) Vehicle Control Service’s signs give conflicting messages. Vehicle Control Service’s signs use of the Highway Code symbol for “No Stopping” which conflicts with the double yellow lines marked on the road, these being recognised in the Highway Code as meaning “No Waiting” as opposed to "No Stopping".

7) The 3 images that are being used as evidence only show the vehicle stationary from 09:52:45 til 09:52:4. As stated I was still reading the sign at this point and had been taken ill, a fact of which this Claimant is fully aware.

8) The Claimant is a well-funded company with a dedicated legal staff and is a serial litigator. I submit that his issuing Particulars of Claim lacking in usable detail or that do not disclose a clear cause of action is not only remiss but smacks of a “Cut and Paste” approach to the issuing of proceedings. I further submit that this demonstrates a disregard for the dignity of the court and little concern for the Claimant’s duties in supporting the court to achieve the overriding objectives..

9) I feel the legal specialists dealing with this case have acted un-professional on a number of occasions using shady tactics to bully me into paying the balance.

10) On the letter dated 24 August 2016 it states “We look forward to hearing from you within 7 days”. I then received a County Court claim form with an issue date of 26 August 2016. BW Legal did not give me enough time to respond and automatically assumed that I would not.

11) When I received the final notice from BW Legal on the 8th June 2016, I noted under the heading “County Court Proceedings” there was a paragraph which stated “”Furthermore this will result in a CCJ being entered against you. A CCJ may have a detrimental effect on your future creditworthiness and your employability”. I feel this is misleading and contrary to the SRA Code of Practice, since a CCJ 'may' be the final outcome but certainly not 'will result'. It is my contention this is written to intimidate and mislead unrepresented Defendants.

12) Again, on the 24 August I received another letter which stated: "You have stated that you had to stop to read the signs in order to understand our client's terms and conditions which are used to operate the area in question. Again confirming you stopped in a prohibited area and therefore are liable for the balance."

This is a catch 22 situation. I do not agree that I was “contractually bound” upon entering the site to Terms and Conditions that had been clearly placed at the entrance to the controlled area and in prominent places throughout. However, it would be impossible for VCS’s signs to “contractually bind” any driver travelling at 30 mph (i.e. the maximum speed limit on the business park).

VCS’s standard entrance sign at Calder Park contains 62 words (excluding the small print at the bottom of the sign and the text contained within the graphics on the sign). According to the Department of Transport guidelines, it would take the driver 23 seconds to read these words (and even longer to read the small print). In a vehicle travelling at 30 mph, this is clearly impossible.

Based upon Department for Transport eyesight standards for driving (i.e. the requirement for a driver to be able to read an 8cm number plate at a distance of 20 metres), for a driver travelling at 30mph, the maximum possible reading times for the key wording on the VCS signs would be as follows:

"No Stopping": 2.05 seconds
"£100 CHARGE IF YOU STOP": 0.75 seconds
"PRIVATE PROPERTY": 1.12 seconds
"VEHICLE CONTROL SERVICES LTD": 0.56 seconds

13) I further submit that such is the complexity and density of the text on the Claimant’s signs that the most onerous term – the £100 parking charge notice – is buried amongst a mass of small print and does not even begin to comply with Denning MR’s “Red Hand Rule”.

14) In the absence of any signage that contractually bound the Defendant then there can have been no contract and the Claimant has no case.

15) In the above circumstances I respectfully ask that the court dismiss the claim.

Statement of Truth
“I believe that the facts stated in this Defence letter dated XX/XX/XXXX are True”
Signed

Coupon-mad

Looking better.

I would add Edna Basher's words by making this point #14 (move the rest down):

14. Applying the rule of contra proferentem, a driver would be entitled to conclude that stopping (but not waiting) on the double yellow lines was permissible. Even though VCS’s signs may try to specify a different meaning of double yellow lines (i.e. “strictly no stopping”) the text is too small to be read by any driver passing at 30 mph.

Also I couldn't see the standard defence point that VCS do not own this site and so you put them to strict proof of their standing and the circumstances under which the landowner allows them to issue parking charges, including any exemption or 'grace period' or 'cancellation of PCN' clauses. At any hearing, you require evidence in the form of the landowner contract because it is contended that VCS do not have a 'legitimate interest' in pursuing a charge against an ill driver who did not park at all.

Also you are missing the usual defence point saying that this case can be distinguished from ParkingEye v Beavis. The significant differing facts in that case (as regards the circumstances, the signs, the commercial set up and contract, and the lack of any contractual offer or agreement on the charge) support your defence.

And you can add a point about 'prohibitive signs' which offer no contract and therefore it can only be a matter of trespass, for which only nominal damages can be sought and only by the landowner (the Supreme Court Judges in Beavis confirmed this view).

l12345

Hi just a little update, got a small claims form through the post! oh the joy!

In section A 'Settlement/Mediation' it asks if I agree for the case to be referred to a Small Claims Mediation Service. I'm a little unsure whether I tick this? would it be beneficial for me to do this?

Umkomaas

would it be beneficial for me to do this?

Only if you enjoy being excessively pressurised by a mediator, who is incentivised to ensure this doesn't get to court, telling you you've no real case to argue and you're bound to lose in court. And a PPC that won't back down, still demanding their full pound of flesh.

Where does that leave you in terms of 'mediation'?

l12345

Ah right, think I'll avoid that! Decision made then. Thanks

Coupon-mad

Read this and bargepole's summary there of what to do when:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/71581749#Comment_71581749

Do you have a Court hearing date and a letter telling you when to get your witness statement and evidence in? If unsure what we mean by that stage, please first read the link and then red bargepole's thread too as shown there.

l12345

Just a little update.

Paid the court fee and had a date set for next month, so was beginning to crap my pants! Opened a letter this morning and BW Legal have called the thing off. Just goes to show you its best to see it through to the end. So happy days

Thanks for everyone that helped! saved me nice £400!

Edna_Basher

Excellent.

However, you still need to get confirmation from the Court - just in case BW Legal are trying to pull a fast one.

l12345

Ah thats a good point. I'll ring them first thing Monday