1 Big Car Park, 2 landowners, Valid parking ticket but Parking Charge Issued

Loadsofchildren123

my case was dropped the afternoon before so still hope!!!

claxtome

my case was dropped the afternoon before so still hope!!!

I have not been home yet so may have a letter for me OR tomorrow
If not I am going to be very prepared for my day in court and will still attend unless I am specifically told otherwise by court....

Loadsofchildren123

We know that the witness is very unlikely to turn up.
The DJ should take issue with this, but they often don't. I'd be ready to argue that you wanted to x-xamine them, so I think you should be ready with the kind of questions you wanted to ask them to demonstrate to him that you are hampered in their absence and he should give little or no weight to their evidence.


eg you would want to ask them:
1. who placed the rubble there and when
2. did they have any communication with the council about the lack of demarcation between the two parts of the car park?
3. how many complaints have they had about tickets given to people who say they thought they had parked in the council-run part and had actually purchased tickets/poor signage?
4. where exactly the dividing line is between the two parts of the car park
5. the points you raise about their signage plan in your SA


Things like that. If the DJ questions why the witness's attendance was necessary you can say that these were the sort of questions you wanted to raise, and they are very relevant.


The CoP (not sure if it's IPC or BPA) has in it various obligations about detailed and meticulous record keeping. So the PPC employee should have at their fingertips all of the information you need (had they turned up).


Make sure you take with you the letter where you told them specifically you want their witness there.


Are you going to look at challenging RoA?

claxtome

Thanks for your guidance again LoC.
I will make sure I am prepared for the witness in case they turn up.

I filed my costs, including adding 'unreasonable behaviour' at court this morning and sent it to Claimant. (Just within the 24hr limit)

Are you going to look at challenging RoA?

I am little unsure what you mean by RoA.
I have seen on here a glossary but can;t seem to find it now

KeithP

RoA = Right of Audience.

claxtome

Thank you KeithP looking into it further and it is to do with the person who turns up tomorrow has the right to conduct legal proceedings in court on behalf of Claimant->
http://www.parkingcowboys.co.uk/right-of-audience/

Any hints/tips/suggestions are welcome.

Will use any 'legal' tactic to get a dismissal

Umkomaas

From what I’ve read in many threads, unless you know your facts on RoA and can argue them correctly and cogently, then it’s tricky territory. Get a grumpy Judge and you risk peeing him/her off before you even start as you will need to raise this at the very outset of your case.

Given you’re so close to the court hearing, plus even where advocates clearly don’t have RoA, there are many Judges who have still allowed them to speak, I’d concentrate on the rest of your case rather than let this consume (and possibly confuse) at such a very late stage.

claxtome

unless you know your facts on RoA and can argue them correctly and cogently

I certainly don't and not sure have the time to learn them

you risk peeing him/her off before you even start

I certainly don't want to do that as think I have a very good case.

Loadsofchildren123

Agree completely with that advice.


although the RoA argument is a good one, and most of the agency advocates sent by the PPCs undoubtedly don't have RoA, the DJs don't generally like the argument. Because it's so rarely raised, they tend to say "Oh, Mr X has appeared lots of times before me, of course he has RoA". A Mr Nash recently got refused RoA in Cardiff, then appeared 2 days later in Swansea and when the Defendant raised it the judge just said that. In other cases, the advocate has just said "but I'm a barrister" and the Defendant, not being fully clued up, has accepted that as meaning they have RoA (when that is not necessarily the case).


You have to be very ballsy and clued up on the legislation to argue it successfully in the face of that sort of attitude.


Running the argument unsuccessfully will rattle your confidence about the rest of your case and may annoy the judge. So I can see why you wouldn't want to muddy the waters trying to argue it if you're not confident about it.

Loadsofchildren123

Have you looked up online who your DJ is? Crossing my fingers it's the same as Kezza's. Not sure what time they publish the listings online.