SCS Law Letter before claim for multiple PCNs-over £1000!!

DiegoFuego

Hi all!

Apologies for the delay. I have an impending exam I am revising for so have been very short on time.

My case was at Clerkenwell Court in London. I didn't note down the name of the judge but from what he said and a quick glance at the schedule for the day, plenty of parking cases go through that court so the judges seem quite experienced. I didn't note down the name of UKPCs rep but he was a qualified solicitor/barrister so it seems they were quite serious about my case.
My experience was a strange one. The court had lost both of our evidence files so they had to be copied and reprinted for the judge to study. The person who had signed the witness statement for UKPC didn't show up which irked the judge somewhat but we carried on with the case.
The judge immediately picked up on a passage in their witness statement which said spoke about the contract giving UKPC authority to issue tickets and bring court proceedings in its own name. The passage described the contract which gave them authority and said that it would be available on the day if requested by the judge. The judge was not pleased by this and requested the contract before we could start on any other evidence as without it, he would adjourn or even strike the claim entirely. The solicitor gave the contract to me and the judge and he requested a short break to study it.

After 10/15mins, we returned and the judge was unimpressed by the contract and for good reason. It looked unprofessional, it was missing parts, it looked as if it could have been written by anyone and it wasn't even the same contract as referenced in the witness statement. The solicitor said that this is all he had been given and could produce nothing else but he understands that there may be further parts to the contract that can be produced at a later date.

At this point the judge asked my opinion and I fully objected to an adjournment as this court date has been known for months, it should be known by them to produce the correct evidence that gives them authority and I have been asking for this contract in my Defence statement and in correspondence with them since this court action began. I said that I had got all my defence together and I am representing myself so it doesn't seem fair to give them many chances at this. Luckily, I had included this correspondence in my pack and the judge could see that I had been asking for it from the beginning.

The judge agreed that a "professional" organisation such as UKPC/SCS should know to bring this evidence, further compounded by the fact I had requested it earlier and he was not minded to give them bite at the cherry with an adjournment. Without the contract the claim failed at the first hurdle. He struck it out immediately!

My tips are to ask for everything from the other side that you feel may help your case and ask for it EARLY!

Also the authority for the parking company to bring court action is very important and they must prove it. If they cannot, you must not be shy and hammer this point and you can have a very short case and a happy result.

(Another small point - the judges really really do appreciate an organised evidence file! My last minute photocopied evidence was not well received!)

Good luck all and thank you!

I asked for costs and he declined as he says that this is given only when the other side has been unreasonable. I am not sure if that's right but I was so happy I just wanted out of there.

Coupon-mad

Very well done again and thanks for the update with your ''court report''.

Redx

yep, well done , an 11 month marathon , that went from wet behind the ears to winning in court with help from the regulars here

given that several pcn,s were involved with a total claim of over a grand , its a good win and shows just how incompetent these "professional" people can be

they appear to have snatched defeat from the jaws of victory due to not having a proper contract in place or to show you or the judge

hence no locus standii , case struck out

must have cost them a few hundred all told , for nil payback

System

Interesting that UKPC are still playing "hide the contract". Seems to be the only trick they know.

Again points to asking for information directly or via a SAR as early in the process as possible.

The_Deep

I asked for costs and he declined as he says that this is given only when the other side has been unreasonable.

I would be inclined to press the matter of costs. Presumably this cost you in terms of postage, photocopy, attendance, travel parking and, most of all, time. Why should you be out of pocket?

Surely the behaviour of the other side has been "unreasonable" here.

According to Wiki In the law of Negligence, the reasonable person standard is the standard of care that a reasonably prudent person would observe under a given set of circumstances. An individual who subscribes to such standards can avoid liability for negligence.

I think the PPC has failed this test, as the case was struck out in short order.r

babeandbp

Thank you for that most helpful information. DQ going back today. Many thanks.

Le_Kirk

babeandbp wrote: »

Thank you for that most helpful information. DQ going back today. Many thanks.

You seem to have posted on someone else's thread and, worse, it is from 2017! Was it posted in error?

The_Deep

Here perhaps

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6015199/vcs-claim-form-days-to-go-before-defence-due-wife-has-just-told-me-about-it

TolsBols

Hello,

Sorry to resurrect a thread from 2017. I'm researching old cases for writing a Witness Statement for my upcoming hearing (see Pepipoo thread here) On Page 9 of this MSE thread, the OP has presented a draft Witness Statement and in Para 10, states the following:

"The sign does not explicitly explain that a driver would be entering into a contract by the specific act of parking and neither does it clearly state who that contract would be with. This is contrary to BPA guidance. The sign submitted also claims that the charge is £90 and yet the claimant has claimed the sign creates a charge for £100. There is no evidence of any contract creating a charge of £100. Regardless, this part of the sign is in very small text and is therefore illegible."

This would have been for an older version of the BPA Code of Practice (probably v5 or v6, as the OP refers to PCNs dating back to 2015/early 2016). Does anyone know if the above still applies to v7 of the BPA CoP? I'm contemplating whether to include it in my own Witness Statement.

Many Thanks.

Umkomaas

Does anyone know if the above still applies to v7 of the BPA CoP? 

The only way we could do that is via research on the BPA website, bringing up both versions, then going through the relevant paragraph line by line. Any reason why you might not be able to do this yourself?

All past CoPs should be available via the BPA website.