Fine after 30seconds

jrc123

rdr - I haven't got that evidence as the document contradicts itself from Network Rail saying: that PCM can do it but yet the road is subject to byelaws. The person probably like myself didn't know all the technical info. So I will leave that out incase.

Umkomaas - I am going to send tomorrow will update it with tomorrows date ok?

Coupon-mad

What evidence are you sending with the WS? Photos? IPC CoP section on grace period?

You must file evidence as well and the NEWBIES thread lists a few suggestions.

jrc123

Hi CP
I have many further pages included in my WS of picture evidence which I have labelled exhibits.

Also I have reference the IPC CoP on the WS as below. is that sufficient? or do I need to provide the FULL IPC CoP?

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.

Coupon-mad

do I need to provide the FULL IPC CoP?

No.

What about the byelaws?

What about Google Streetview images of the signs looking really small?

jrc123

I will add in more images of the sign.
I already have images as exhibits of me walking over to the signs.

wouldnt point 7 which is discussing the byelaws be enough?

Castle

I think this was the same road; with the judge ruling, (in post 118), that 63 seconds wasn't long enough to enter a contract:-
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=113748&st=100

Coupon-mad

jrc123 wrote: »

wouldnt point 7 which is discussing the byelaws be enough?

Obviously not, it is not evidence, it's hearsay from you when not backed with evidence.

All the Claimant would have to say is 'this land isn't covered by byelaws'!

jrc123

thank you for that I shall read through! amazing!

jrc123

I have an image of the sign from Network Rail which I have put into Point 7 and the images sign on the railings near where I stopped says:

This road is private property
Any parking is prohibited at all times in accordance is railway byelaws 14
any trespacers will face legal action
24 hours for railways use.

I have put that in my witness statement and exhibit/images

should i quote byelaws 14? or do anything else?

jrc123

also should I wait for the claimant to send there WS to me first so I can counter argue?