Do I have a case or shall I just pay it? Galdstone letter

Coupon-mad

But earlier on I've made a comments about not complying with Practice Direction and NTK has got no photo evidence.

Leave in comments about the Practice Direction.

Remove the bit about the NTK not including any photo evidence.

Sorreeeee to throw one more thing in:

Have you got The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 in your evidence to support your skeleton argument?

http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/consumer-contracts-regulations

Information that must be provided by 'durable medium' for ANY distance (non face-to-face) contract and certainly those contracts involving an exchange of texts using a phone:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/3134/regulation/13/made

Wording here from the Parking Prankster, near the bottom of this article:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/heath-parade-graham-park-way-scam-site.html

And providing parking spaces as a 'service' for a charge would be covered, as shown here in the Guidance:

http://ec.europa.eu/justice/consumer-marketing/files/crd_guidance_en.pdf

search that PDF for the word 'parking' and you get:

''For example, renting a parking space ... is subject to the Directive. ''

Loadsofchildren123

I haven't fully read up on the consumer law aspects of these claims (next job) so I'm not the best person to advise on whether you should put all your eggs in one basket with the distance contract argument.

Personally though, I'd argue everything in the alternative (ie start with your strongest argument, if that fails, you argue point 2 in the alternative, then point 3 and so on).

If there's one thing this forum has shown me it's that there are usually multiple defences a defendant can rely on.

hopsfield

I think my strongest argument is - the ticket was purchased in a good faith for the duration of 12hr... but due to glitch the initial payment didnt go through. Or would you stick to poor robo claims from the Claimant?
As for the Consumer Law I tried to read it but can't see if how I can get any of my arguments to stick to it.

Coupon-mad

As for the Consumer Law I tried to read it but can't see if how I can get any of my arguments to stick to it.

I can. The 'informational requirements' for a distance contract were missing from the signs. You've argued 'unclear signs' in your defence, so like Loadsofchildren123 says, you argue point by point (i.e. start with your strongest argument, if that fails, you argue point 2 in the alternative, then point 3 and so on).

So, if the Judge decides the TERMS on the signs are OK in his/her view when compared to the Beavis sign, and looks twitchy and expects your next point(!) you go for 'even if the signs are considered potentially capable of forming a contract, they fail under the applicable UK Law for contracts formed by phone or text, in any event, due to the informational requirements of the (regs) blah blah...then cite the informational requirements to be given to a consumer BEFORE concluding a distance contract (which this one is!!).

Then you move on, in the alternative (next point) etc.

The Judge only has to agree with one point of defence to turn the case around, as was proved this week when Barry Beavis lay repped:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/02/vehicle-control-services-issue-charge.html

So one by one, go through your defence points. You might also want to have a single sheet of 'main points' in case the Judge asks for you to 'briefly summarise your defence' as soon as you arrive (after you've challenged the Right of Audience of the claimant's hired rep)!

hopsfield

thank you

I have also found this
Also I have just noticed that the Evidence - Parking Enforcement Agreement is

Agreement dated 01.04.2014 between
1)SIP CAR PARKS LIMITED (reg no xxxx) at address xxxxx ("the Landlord")
2)SIP PARKING LIMITED (reg no yyyy) at address xxxx (the Operator)

IT IS HEREBY AGREED THAT
The Landlord (acting as the owner or landlords authorized agent) wishes to appoint Operator to provide car park management services )

Now this means the Claimant has not show an evidence the Claimant is lawful occupier or owner of the Relevant Land and has not shown any authority to issue or pursue parking charges in its own name. Its just an agreement between 2 same companies even registered at same address.

Coupon-mad

Yes if it only says 'car park management services' it isn't clear which company maintains the right to sue. I'm not sure a Judge would necessarily listen to that one if there is evidence that SIP CAR PARKS LIMITED (reg no xxxx) is the landholder, I think they'd be satisfied that a contract exists. Could be wrong but that would be lower down the pecking order in my view.

hopsfield

Also Thank you for the explanation! I understand the point of Consumer Law now.

Coupon-mad

And it's important to also print off the EU Guidance with the phrase 'rental of a parking space is covered by the regulations' highlighted!

Loadsofchildren123

hopsfield, who owns the land and who is the Claimant?
You need to ask them to provide evidence of land ownership.

If they won't (as they wouldn't in my case) I did my own Land Registry search for £3 and in my case the contract is NOT with the landowner. That gives you another good argument. I think you can do it over the phone (did mine at work, we have an account so I could do it online).

There is no right way to set out the Skeleton. Perhaps like this so it is really organised-

Court heading.
Head it "DEFENDANT'S CASE SUMMARY AND SKELETON".

Start with glossary of abbreviations (eg NtK, NtD, POFA etc).

I would then set out your "pure" defences which don't respond to their case but which you say are killer defences (eg no compliant NtK, the distance selling point. ). Then set out each element of their case and your rebuttal.
So:

1. distance selling point
2. POFA point
Etc
Then
3. Claimants case point 1:
Eg Defendant was the driver (reference para number in the claim and the WS)
Defendant's case: (and again reference the page/para numbers of the relevant documents
Defendant relies on (name case and relevant paragraph numbers)

4. Claimant's case point 2:
eg contract was formed with driver, relies on signage
Defendant's case: no contract was formed. The signage was not clear, prominent etc. (Cross refer as above and list the cases you rely on)

5. And so on.

This format may not suit your case. There is no right or wrong way to do it. It's just a method of getting a concise summary in front of the judge which includes legal as well as factual argument. I am working on my skeleton. I will post it on my thread for critique but not til at least tomorrow.

Drafting these things is a pain but actually it's good preparation and sorts it all out in your head.

As CM says do a separate bullet point list of your defences for your own use. And a list of your legal authorities.

Loadsofchildren123

At what stage did they produce that agreement?
If late, point this out in the Skeleton.

Do a separate section at the end entitled "costs".
1. list all the ways they have behaved unreasonably and every breach of the court rules.
2. Then say that their conduct has clearly been unreasonable under CPR 27.14(2)g
3. The unreasonableness should be treated all the more seriously because they are a professional parking company and issuing and chasing/suing for payment of PCNs is their day to day business, whereas you (and other defendants) are lay people who have no experience of any of these matters.
4. Therefore the court should make a costs order
5. This is the case whether you win or lose - quote the pre-action practice direction, I think its para 15). And the overriding objective. Their conduct has been contemptuous of the court, contrary to the common law principle of Natural Justice and you have been forced to go to great lengths to defend the claim. It is right that they should be penalised.