Fine after 30seconds

jrc123

I have added reference to the images and case studies in the WS as the final point:

14. Exhibited to this witness statement are the following documents in the attached bundle
that I wish to rely on:

1. Exhibit JJ-01
2. Exhibit JJ-02
3. Exhibit JJ-03
4. Exhibit JJ-04
5. Exhibit JJ-05
6. Exhibit JJ-06
7. Exhibit JJ-07
8. Exhibit JJ-08
9. Exhibit JJ-09
10. Exhibit JJ-010
11. Railway Byelaws
12. Legislative Consent Memorandum !!!8211; Parking (Code of Practice) Bill !!!8211; Scottish Government March 2018
13. Protection of Freedoms 2012: Schedule 4
14. POPLA 2015 Annual Report
15. ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67
16. IPC Code of Practice Part A) 9)

Loadsofchildren123

I wouldn't organise it in the way you have.


The key is the Statement of Truth at the end of your first section. anything not within that section or not referred to in it is not covered by the STatement of Truth. To be fair, a judge probably wouldn't pull up a litigant in person over this. But I don't see the point or benefit in organising it this way.


The WS tells your story. Think of it as if you are writing a letter to your mother/aunt/friend in Australia telling them the story. Write it in the first person (I did xxx, not the Defendant did xxx).


I think you should explain why you said what you did in your appeal. Say you panicked, but it is clear from the time you stopped and from the photos that what you are saying in the WS is true, that you stopped because you wanted to park up, saw the signs and got out to read them. Make the point that if a contract is being offered to a person (in this case a contract to park) then before it is entered into the person needs to be able to read and to consider the terms (particularly when there was no warning sign at the entrance).


So tell the story and at each relevant point, refer to the bits of evidence you have.


So:


On x date, I drove to x [and then say why you went there - eg I was delivering something to one of the businesses there, or I had 30 minutes to kill in between appointments and wanted to park up somewhere and have a rest, whatever]. As I entered [name of road/industrial estate/whatever the land was] there was no sign at the entrance and nothing to distinguish it as private land or that it was subject to parking controls (see photograph at page x of XX1 [XX is the name of the exhibit, XX being your initials).


I saw a suitable spot to park, but I could see a sign on the chainmail/wooden fence [or on the lamp post, whatever] and so I pulled over and got out of the car to go and read it before deciding whether or not to park there. The sign was quite small and there was no way I could read it from my car. As I got out to go and read it, I left my car engine running and the driver's door open, and this can clearly be seen in photographs taken by the Claimant's operative (page xx of XX1).


I walked over to the sign and read it. I could see immediately that it was about parking and I wanted to see if I could or could not park there (eg if I could pay and display, or pay online, or whether I needed a permit). When I read the sign I realised that I could not pay to park there and so I turned to walk back to my car, intending to leave immediately. It was then that I noticed a person taking photographs of me. I assumed this person was employed by the parking company and so I shouted over to him that I'd just read the sign and was leaving.


The Claimant's own evidence, which it sent to me at my request, shows that I was there for 2 minutes and 10 seconds. This was the time it took me to pull over, put the car into parking mode, get out, walk over to the sign, read it, walk back to the car and drive off. It is clear that 2 minutes and 10 seconds does not constitute "parking" in any sense of the word.


[Then refer to the PPC's relevant CoP (BPA or IPC) and what it says about grace periods:
Something like this:
I understand that in order to be able to obtain keeper details from the DVLA a private parking company like the C must be a member of one of two ATAs. This Claimant is a member of [whichever one]. A condition of such membership is that members must comply with a compulsory Code of Practice. Paragraph x of that Code says ........... It is clear that the grace period is meant for a driver to have time after entering a site to find a parking space, to leave, and to read the signage on display. It is not inconceivable that once a driver enters a site, they may choose not to proceed to park once they have read the terms and conditions. For instance, the terms and conditions may prohibit parking, or the driver may realise they cannot comply with the terms offered (eg they do not have enough money to pay and display a ticket, or they may not qualify for a permit). Put simply, a driver has to be given the opportunity to read the terms offered and to decide whether or not to accept them.


On this occasion, once I had read the terms offered, I decided not to accept them and I left the site immediately. I did not park, I did not receive any benefit of parking, I simply stopped momentarily to decide whether or not I could or should park there and decided not to. The Claimant's own photographs show that this is all that happened (page xx of XX1).


I was surprised to then receive a charge through the post. I appealed it immediately. Foolishly, I said in the appeal that I had pulled over because I felt sick. I said this because I panicked and I thought that this would be more convincing. I am not an educated person and I did not understand then what I understand now about how parking contracts are formed, and about the requirement on the Claimant to comply with IPC/BPA's Code of Practice. The fact remains that whatever I said in my appeal, I was only on the site for a very brief time and the Claimant's own photographs show me exiting the car to read the signage and then getting back in to drive away.


I also did not realise then, but realise now that the land is subject to Railway Byelaws which mean that any parking restrictions can only be enforced in the Magistrates Court [etc etc - set that part of your argument out here].


I have also discovered, having enquired of the Highways Department at xxx Council that the road in question is in fact public highway. Therefore it cannot be subject to private parking controls/terms and conditions. Only the local council can impose and enforce parking restrictions and impose charges for failing to comply with them [then set out the facts and relevant documents about this]. The Claimant has not produced any evidence that it has any sort of contract with the Council in respect of the roadway.




Hope this helps. Have another bash at it and post it up here again.


Just think of it like writing a letter or a book. Tell the story in order of how things happened.

Loadsofchildren123

I'd also leave out references to Scotland, it's confusing

jrc123

WOW going to read through this all now and adjust my WS. will report back

thanks so much!

jrc123

also where can I find out maximum costs I can claim for?
do I send that in the same time to the court or take on the day?

jrc123

are these costs ok:

In the County Court at XXX

Claim No.: XXX

Between
XXX
(Claimant)
-v-
XXX
(Defendant)

DEFENDANT'S SCHEDULE OF COSTS

Ordinary Costs

Loss of earnings/leave, incurred through attendance at Court 13/08/2017 £90.00
Tube travel from home address to Court £12.10
Sub-total £102.10 ======

Further costs for Claimant's unreasonable behaviour, pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 27.14(2)(g)

Research, preparation and drafting of documents (10 hours at Litigant in Person rate of £19.00 per hour) £190.00

Stationery, printing, photocopying and postage: £15.00

Sub-total £205.00 ======

£ 307.10 TOTAL COSTS CLAIMED

are these right?

jrc123

hi I have my updated WS is this ok?

Claim No. xxx
In the Matter of:
xxx Limited (Claimant)
-v-
xxx (Defendant)
___________________________________
Witness Statement
___________________________________

I am xxx and I am the defendant in this matter and litigant in person.

1. On 12th May 2017, I drove through xxx and had to pull over for a short period of time. As I entered xxx there was no sign at the entrance and nothing to distinguish it as private land or that it was subject to parking controls (see photograph at page 4 of 10, labelled Exhibit xx-01).

2. I saw a suitable spot to park, but I could see a sign on the metal railings and so I pulled over and got out of the car to go and read it before deciding whether or not to park there. The sign was quite small and there was no way I could read it from my car. As I got out to go and read it, I left my car engine running and the driver's door open, and this can clearly be seen in photographs taken by the Claimant's operative (through pages 5-7 of 10, photographs labelled Exhibit xx-05,xx-06, xx-07).

3. I walked over to the sign and read it. I could see immediately that it was about parking and I wanted to see if I could or could not park there (e.g. if I could pay and display, or pay online, or whether I needed a permit). When I read the sign, I realised that I could not pay to park there and so I turned to walk back to my car, intending to leave immediately. It was then that I noticed a person taking photographs of me. I assumed this person was employed by the parking company and so I shouted over to him that I'd just read the sign and was leaving.

4. The Claimant's own evidence, which it sent to me at my request, shows that I was there for 2 minutes and 10 seconds. This was the time it took me to pull over, put the car into parking mode, get out, walk over to the sign, read it, walk back to the car and drive off. It is clear that 2 minutes and 10 seconds does not constitute "parking" in any sense of the word.

I understand that in order to be able to obtain keeper details from the DVLA a private parking company like the Claimant must be a member of one of two ATAs. This Claimant is a member of IPC. A condition of such membership is that members must comply with a compulsory Code of Practice. Point 15 of that Code says -
The International Parking Community (IPC) Code of Practice code of conduct states that a grace period (15.1 & 15.2) must be allowed in order that a driver might spot signage, go up to it, read it and then decide whether to accept the terms or not. A reasonable grace period in any car park would be from 5-15 minutes from the period of stopping. This grace period was not observed and therefore the operator is in breach of the industry code of practice. Additionally, no contract can be in place by conduct until a reasonable period elapses.

(15.1) Drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to park and read any signs so they may make an informed decision as to whether or not to remain on the site.

(15.2) Drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to leave a site after a pre-paid or permitted period of parking has expired.

It is clear that the grace period is meant for a driver to have time after entering a site to find a parking space, to leave, and to read the signage on display. It is not inconceivable that once a driver enters a site, they may choose not to proceed to park once they have read the terms and conditions. For instance, the terms and conditions may prohibit parking, or the driver may realise they cannot comply with the terms offered (eg they do not have enough money to pay and display a ticket, or they may not qualify for a permit). Put simply, a driver has to be given the opportunity to read the terms offered and to decide whether or not to accept them.

5. On this occasion, once I had read the terms offered, I decided not to accept them, and I left the site immediately. I did not park, I did not receive any benefit of parking, I simply stopped momentarily to decide whether or not I could or should park there and decided not to. The Claimant's own photographs show that this is all that happened (through pages 8-10 of 10, photographs labelled xx-05. xx-06 and xx-07).

6. I was surprised to then receive a charge through the post. I appealed it immediately. Foolishly, I said in the appeal that I had pulled over because I felt sick. I said this because I panicked, and I thought that this would be more convincing. I am not an educated person and I did not understand then what I understand now about how parking contracts are formed, and about the requirement on the Claimant to comply with IPC Code of Practice. The fact remains that whatever I said in my appeal, I was only on the site for a very brief time and the Claimant's own photographs show me exiting the car to read the signage and then getting back in to drive away.

7. I also did not realise then, but realise now that the land is subject to Railway Byelaws, therefore this is not a claim to be brought by the Parking Control Management (PCM) Ltd but by the Train Operating Company which leases the land/or the landowner and the correct procedure is for such proceedings to be pursued in the magistrate!!!8217;s court, not the county court.
The claimant's claim should be struck out because any claim of breach of byelaws is a matter for Magistrates' court, and if the claimant is suggesting that they can run contract law alongside byelaws on 'non-relevant land' (as defined in the POFA) then it is a fact that a registered keeper/driver cannot be held liable in law, in any case.

The IPC Code of Conduct 9.1 states; It is your (PCM Ltd) responsibility to establish whether any land upon which you operate is subject to any Byelaws. Where land is subject to Byelaws you must ensure that your practices are in accordance with them or, alternatively, that you operate a scheme that is not prohibited by them. PCM have broken this code as stated in the points above.

8. The Claimants are known to be serial issuers of generic claims similar to this one. I believe the term for such behaviour is roboclaims and as such is against the public interest.

9. I also dispute that the Claimant has incurred £50 Legal representative's costs to pursue an alleged £100 debt, the costs of which are in any case not recoverable.

10. The claimant described the charge of £50 as 'legal fees' not 'contractual costs', CPR.14 does not permit these to be recoverable in the Small Claims Court.

11. The Claimant has at no time provided an explanation how the sum has been calculated, the conduct that gave rise to it or how the amount has climbed from £100 to £xxx. This is the epitome of a typical robo-claim emanating from what MPs described recently as an 'outrageous scam' (Hansard 2.2.18) industry.

12. Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd is not the lawful occupier of the land. I have reasonable belief that they do not have the authority to issue charges on this land in their own name and that they have no rights to bring this case.

13. Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd is not the landowner and is merely an agent acting on behalf of the landowner and has failed to demonstrate their legal standing to form a contract.

14. The Claimant is put to proof that it has sufficient interest in the land or that there are specific terms in its contract to bring an action on its own behalf. As a third party agent, the Claimant may not pursue any charge. I have reasonable belief that they do not have the authority to issue charges on this land in their own name and that they have no right to bring action regarding this claim.


STATEMENT of TRUTH
I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true
Dated the 19th August 2017
Signed: xxx (Claimant)

jrc123

anyone?
As i have to send this off as soon as possible.

rdr

Add that the road is a public highway at 12 if that is the case, and evidence it

Umkomaas

What date are you using for the statement of truth?