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

Coupon-mad

Have you got proof that they offered to settle at £20, as long as that letter or email was not marked 'without prejudice, save as to costs'?

If it had those words then you can't show it until it comes to the end of the hearing and the matter of costs (so take it with you on the day) where you can show that Britannia made no loss and there were no damages over and above twenty quid's worth of 'admin' - but on principal you chose to fight the unfair ticket.

What about looking at Google StreetView to see if you can find the outer signs of that car park, if you chance the Street View date to early 2017? You can move the date back in GSV and maybe the outer sign will show from the nearby street, as completely different?

Jamesrb

Yes, I have the letter showing they offered £20. Their is no mention on the letter anywhere of ‘without prejudice’ so will be using it for definite.
Their wording on the letter is:
‘Due to an operator error, we have incurred a cost from issuing a Parking Charge Notice. We believe this can be resolved amicably therefore we have discounted the value of the Parking Charge Notice to £20’

Unfortunately Google street View is August 2018, when the new signs were in place it seems, but thanks for the suggestion, I’d have never thought of that.

Thanks

Coupon-mad

So no previous GSV when you change the date, as you can...?

Really?

''Due to an operator error''

YAY!
Do you read that like I do, as an admission that they are saying the PCN was caused by ''an operator error'' (i.e. they admit the fault lay with their app) and not with you?

You must add words about that to draw their letter to the attention of the Judge! i.e. they ADMITTED this entire event was ''due to an operator error'' and NOT caused by you, and they wanted £20 from you to ''cover their costs''. Therefore there was never a cause of action against you, for any conduct or breach caused by you!

Jamesrb

I personally read it as they meant it was my error as the operator of the app. But suppose I could at least give it a go, it’s not actually specifically pointing the finger at me so I’ve maybe read it wrong. Will look at the previous street view images, wasn’t aware you could look at older ones. Thanks very much.

Jamesrb

Genius, thanks you so much coupon-mad, the signage in 2017 is different to that in 2018.
2017 shows it as a pay and display car park, 2018 shows it as camera controlled. Also a sign by the enterance in 2018 that wasn’t there in 2017 so will use that also. Thank you again.

Coupon-mad

I personally read it as they meant it was my error as the operator of the app.

A PPC would never describe a consumer as an operator. Never, ever.

You MUST attack this and use it in evidence that the Claimant has admitted error by it's phone APP Operator, in bringing forward a very old 2015 VRN. Never justified data retention after that amount of time - in 2 years many people would have sold that car, or at least cannot be assumed to be using the same car so long later. And the Claimant has admitted their 'operator error'.

Jamesrb

Attended court today.
I lost.
£201 awarded to claimant. In hindsight I should have just settled the £20 offer in the first place but suppose I felt I had to give it a go.
I’d like to thank everyone who offered help throughout the thread, special thanks to Coupon-Mad who goes the extra step with all of this. Much appreciated. Good luck to all.
Cheers
James

DoaM

Sorry to hear that. What was the judge's reasoning for finding against you? Did you challenge the double-recovery in the claimant's claim? (The £60 debt recovery cost was never incurred and was ONLY a means to increase the value of the claim).

Coupon-mad

Jamesrb wrote: »

Attended court today.
I lost.
£201 awarded to claimant. In hindsight I should have just settled the £20 offer in the first place but suppose I felt I had to give it a go.
I’d like to thank everyone who offered help throughout the thread, special thanks to Coupon-Mad who goes the extra step with all of this. Much appreciated. Good luck to all.
Cheers
James

Oh that makes for sad reading.

Not sure how you lost this one, given the app using old data and the PP admitting to operator error (i.e. the app) which fails the DPA and the Distance Contract consumer regulations.

What did the Judge say? Which Judge & which court?

How on earth did they get over £200 when the added £60 damages are unrecoverable, you did point this out using the Beavis case as the example of why only the parking charge is potentially recoverable?

Only £100 plus fifty quid court fees was in play.

Jamesrb

Wakefield court. Not sure on the judges name, she was having none of it though. I stressed about the £20 they had said was their costs, stressed how they admitted operator error, stressed about the fault of the app she wasn’t interested, said I was at fault for not checking the reg in the app and it was my duty to do so. She said it was all in the terms and conditions, which I highlighted about the signage being irrelevant but she put her hand up and stopped me mid sentence, almost looked furious I even questioned her, then just smacked me with the £100, and allowed £100 in costs. Reduced the interest payment to £1, and wouldn’t entertain anything more I had to say basically. Was all over in about 5 minutes. Maybe late for lunch? Who knows, all done now though, worth a try I suppose. Thanks again.