Entered Wrong reg on App. messed up my appeal now.

Redx

the way I read it was that the judge had ordered the claimant to submit revised POC and the defendant then has to submit a revised defence, even though this is close to or at the WS + EXHIBITS stage

the OP hasnt specifically stated that the revised defence has been submitted yet , so no wonder we are confused !!!

if you have NOT submitted a revised DEFENCE, then do so

after that comes the WS + EXHIBITS stage (as is usual) which the judge or court may have ordered you to do by a certain date, if so, then do so

when all this started you admitted to being the driver and it seems the wrong VRM details were paid for

YOU took the view that you were NOT paying the pcn sent to you as driver, so you must have felt that you had a case because they had received money, even though it was for a vehicle not present in their car park

the legal case sets out your defence , including questioning any contracts, signage etc

your WS tells the story of what happened on the day, plus you can submit your evidence that supports your story, plus any other WS like landowner or witnesses etc too

sometimes there is no defnce, a driver paid for the wrong vehicle, the system detected that the VRM in the car park had no payment listed against it, and issued a pcn

you decided not to pay it

I dont know but it seems that you didnt go to POPLA (if available)

the claimant had 6 years to take you to court, they are doing so, because they claim you are in breach of contract and owe them money, namely £100 or whatever the signage said

its clear you didnt want to pay of feel that you should pay, hence your defence and WS


we are dealing with hundreds of threads on here, you are only involved in this one and nothing else, yet to expect us to have complete knowledge about your single case ?

Jamesrb

So this is my attempt at a witness statement, its copied off notepad so looks a bit unformatted. I'll tidy it up when I send it to the court. Pretty sure that ive not really got the paragraph numbering correct. I've copied a bit from Coupon-Mads example in the Newbies post 2 which seemed too good not to use.
Any help all round is appreciated:


 IN THE COUNTY COURT AT xxxxxx
Claim No.: xxxxxxx
　
Between

Brittania Parking (Claimant)

-and-


[Me] (Defendant)


_____________________

WITNESS STATEMENT
_____________________
1. I am xxxx of xxxx , the defendant in this matter. I will say as follows:
2. On xxxx I visited Plymouth Charles Cross Car Park and parked the vehicle I was driving xxxx at Plymouth Charles Cross.
3. I arrived at the car park on Friday xx/07/17 at approximately 23:00 after a 5.5 hour drive from Yorkshire. I had my Wife, my brother and my Mum in the car with me. We were booked to stay for 2 nights at the Jurys Inn, Plymouth as we were attending a family friend’s military wedding on the Saturday xx/07/17.
4. I had travelled to Plymouth with my family in my wife’s Nissan Juke, Reg xxxx which I am insured to drive also. On arrival at the car park we went straight to the hotel as their website offered a discount overnight rate at the car park. We checked into the hotel, gave them my wifes car registration and paid £8 to them for the car park which covered us from 23:00 xx/07/17 until 11:00 xx/07/17. I have attached my hotel invoice to show this payment and proof of hotel booking. The next morning I had my alarm on my phone set for 11:00am as a reminder to sort the car park and the next morning I used the Pay By Phone mobile phone app along with the location code 79070 to pay £11.30p to cover me for 24 hours 11:00 1xx/07/17 until 11:00 xx/07/17. At 11:00 on the xx/07/17 when I went to the car after check out from the hotel I found the Parking Charge Notice attached to my car window. It then became apparent when I investigated further that the app had selected my own car reg xxxx for the parking session.
5. When i first used the Pay By Phone Mobile Phone App in 2015 it asked for my car registration. I had only used it one other time since 2015. Once set up, when the app is accessed it asks for a location code to allow you to confirm the location of where you are parking, the next step the app asks you to enter the length of stay, which immediately draws your attention away from the fact that it had carried forward my own cars registration xxxx and it doesn’t ask you to specifically enter the registration of the vehicle being parked, after that you enter the card for payment, confirm and the transaction is completed. Attached are the screen shots of the app showing this process.
6. The screen shots of the app provided by the claimant, in their reply to defence, of the app is the process from when the app is first used, it does not ask you to enter the registration each time you use it after the initial set up. I did this process in 2015 so the app should not store and presume old data for over 2 years later.
7. The claimant states that I admitted to entering the wrong registration on the app in my letter I sent them explaining the problem to them. I did not state that I entered the wrong reg, I stated that I had paid for the parking for the wrong car, this is not admitting fault, it is stating fact as it was the fault of the app that allows this to happen.

8. Also the claimant has shown in their reply to defence that they were aware I had made the required payment but accept it was to the wrong car which is why they reduced the fine to £20 to cover their admin charges. The Popla appeal process was ongoing and took longer than the 14 days that the reduced offer of £20 was available before it rose back up 5 fold to an unrealistic reflection of actual costs incurred.
9. The fact I made reasonable endeavors and cannot be penalised under UK contract law is also a circumstance supported by trite law. Authority for this is the case of Jolley v Carmel Ltd [2000] 2 EGLR 154, where it was held that a party who makes reasonable endeavors to comply with contractual terms, should not be penalised for breach when unable to fully comply with the terms.

10. Even if the Court believes a contract potentially existed, the Law Reform (Frustrated Contracts) Act 1943 applies. It states at 1.(1) ''money due but not paid before frustration ceases to be payable'' and "a contract may be discharged on the ground of frustration. The unforeseeable frustration brings a contract to an end forthwith and automatically"

11. Due to frustration of contract, where matters were outside my control due to storage of old data on the app (the Claimant has adduced no evidence of fault on my part) the contract was never properly or fairly made.

12. In addition to the original parking charge, believed to be £100, for which liability is denied, the Claimants have artificially inflated the value of the Claim by adding purported ‘Solicitor’s Costs’ of£60which I submit have not actually been incurred by the Claimant.

13. Whilst £60 may be recoverable in an instance where a claimant has used a legal firm to prepare a claim, Brittania have not expended such a sum on my case. They employ salaried in-house Solicitors and file hundreds of similar robo-claims per week, not incurring any legal cost per case. I put the Claimant to strict proof to the contrary because xxxx (contact for my case) cannot possibly be believed to be paid in the millions for his services.

14. The added 'legal' cost is an artificially invented figure (carefully avoided in the Beavis case where only £85 was pursued, presumably to avoid just such scrutiny). This is a cynical attempt to circumvent the Small Claims costs rules using double recovery.

15. Claimant states ‘The terms and conditions which the Defendant accepted upon entering the Car Park, are clear and unambiguous. The terms make it clear that the Defendant should have
purchased a valid Pay and Display Ticket ('PDT'), detailing his full and accurate
Vehicle Registration Mark ('VRM')’

Despite requests being made for pictures of signage at the car park the claimant has been unable to provide me with photos of such signage. The only sign visible when entering the car park is the one attached which I have obtained which shows no such instruction, or if it is then the small print is unclear and not visible from the car a distance away. (the only pic I have been able to get is a picture of the car park opening times at the entrance that has a shed load of small print at the bottom which definitely cant be read even from a photo stood in front, let alone from a car on the road) 　

. The Court is invited to dismiss the Claim, and to allow such Defendants costs as are permissible under Civil Procedure Rule 27.14.

Jamesrb

?? Any help or feedback welcomed...

Jamesrb

Nobody at all?

Le_Kirk

It tells the story of what happened (even if the first section is a little detailed) and includes all the points that hopefully are in your defence.

Jamesrb

Just had the revised witness statement from BW Legal sent through, 63 pages long. I have little faith that my witness statement is even close to sufficient so think I'm just going to pay the fine and save all the court hassle.

Coupon-mad

NONONONONONO, that would be STUPID.

You do realise you've merely received the TEMPLATE WS that everyone gets?

The sum you'd gave to pay now, is double what a Judge might order if you lost, and we only lose in 1% of cases.

What on earth are you thinking? You want to pay DOUBLE what you risk at the hearing?

I am unclear what evidence you included with that WS, though?

For goodness sake calm down, this is normal. A WS of a stupid number of pages is NORMAL and we still win 99% of the time.

Why are you calling it a fine? You know it's an ''outrageous scam'' (Hansard 2.2.18).

What on earth have they done that's knocked your confidence?

Umkomaas

I wouldn’t imagine a Judge would be overly impressed with 63 pages of copy and paste stuff dumped on him/her to read. Maintain the moral high ground by not being intimidated by them through the volume they have created.

Keep yours sensible and proportional to a small claim for a relatively small amount.

Jamesrb

Coupon-mad wrote: »

NONONONONONO, that would be STUPID.

You do realise you've merely received the TEMPLATE WS that everyone gets?

The sum you'd gave to pay now, is double what a Judge might order if you lost, and we only lose in 1% of cases.

What on earth are you thinking? You want to pay DOUBLE what you risk at the hearing?

I am unclear what evidence you included with that WS, though? What evidence did you supply, and tell us what has impressed you about their useless template of drivel?

The fact they produced lots of photos?

The fact the WS looks like it was written to kill your case (no, it wasn't, it's cut & paste)?

For goodness sake calm down, this is normal. A WS of a stupid number of pages is NORMAL and we still win 99% of the time.

Why are you calling it a fine? You know it's a scam.

What on earth have they done that's knocked your confidence?

I haven't actually submitted the Witness statement yet, I was waiting for any feedback because it didn't feel quite right. The evidence I will be supplying is screenshots of the app to show how the first page asks for the location then the second asks for the duration to show how it carries your registration forward.
The evidence they have provided in their revised witness statement shows the signage at the location which takes away that argument so I wont be able to use that detail now.
They do mention several times in the new one that I was the keeper of the vehicle, and that NTK letters were sent and my info obtained from the DVLA which I can dispute as I specifically told them that I was not the keeper of the vehicle, just the driver.
Not sure what else to do though.

Coupon-mad

I haven't actually submitted the Witness statement yet, I was waiting for any feedback because it didn't feel quite right.

Good, so now you can add to it. How do you think standard pics of signage takes away from your argument about the app (the app being the true exchange of information and the actual 'point of sale' that forms the distance contract?).

I specifically told them that I was not the keeper of the vehicle, just the driver.

OK, but no need to dispute that they are calling you the keeper, it's unimportant as you were the driver.

Why not show us the entire evidence pack suitably redacted, have they sent it in electronic form so you can go through and cover your name, address, VRN and PCN number, etc, and show it and the photo 'evidence' to us so we can help you?