Court proceedings for auto repair visit

foofcat

argh I don't want to delete the thread because it's been so helpful, so I've gone back and tried to remove anything that could help them identify me or otherwise cause trouble.

Do judges usually take kindly to attempts to use online forum postings against defendants? Or do they think defendants shouldn't be using them?

Thanks Quentin

Lamilad

argh I don't want to delete the thread because it's been so helpful, so I've gone back and tried to remove anything that could help them identify me or otherwise cause trouble.

Do judges usually take kindly to attempts to use online forum postings against defendants? Or do they think defendants shouldn't be using them?

Thanks Quentin

Excel tried to use a full forum thread against me as evidence in court. It backfired because I had been honest throughout and they had tried to twist perfectly innocent comments into meaning something they didn't.

The judge had no issue that an unrepresented LiP had sought advice from an online forum and in fact praised some of the posters as "having good legal knowledge"

foofcat

Excel tried to use a full forum thread against me as evidence in court. It backfired because I had been honest throughout and they had tried to twist perfectly innocent comments into meaning something they didn't.

Cheeky so and sos. Did you have to point that out in court or was it obvious what they were doing? The thought of having to speak up in my defence is more than a little daunting, as you said!

The judge had no issue that an unrepresented LiP had sought advice from an online forum and in fact praised some of the posters as "having good legal knowledge"

So far, I'd agree with that judge's assessment I hope I get a nice or at least not hostile judge!

Lamilad

. I'm seeing a lot of references in others to ParkingEye vs Beavis but I can't see how it would help me. But also don't want to miss a trick.

The Beavis case relied on clear, prominent, ample signage, we reference it in cases where the signage didn't meet such criteria. Don't think that will apply here as you will state you had no knowledge of the parking event.

The SC also found that the extortionate parking charge was not a penalty (which would have made it unenforceable) so you could argue that as this issues is so vastly different to Beavis that the SC ruling does not apply here and PCM's charge is clearly a penalty, therefore unenforceable.

Will my defence require reference to other cases?!

Not really, it's just a list of points as to why you dispute the claim as stated in their particulars of claim. You can mention other cases but really that's for your witness statement and skeleton argument.

Lamilad

Is it too weak if my defence is only based on those two things (that I discharged liability in accordance with PofA and bylaw 14)? All the other examples seem to have a million other things in their defence too. (Like signs being poorly lit or not mentioning additional fees if they have to chase you)

Your defence could have 50 points and be Weak or 1 point and be strong.

You can just focus on the fact that you discharged your liability and the claim against you is utterly without merit.

The railway bylaws point is strong too and hopefully someone will be able to advise further on that aspect

Your defence should be heavily weighted on these arguments.

You can do a "cover all" defence - in case the judge decides you are liable - which goes on to argue every possible reason why the charge should not/ cannot be enforced.

How ever many points you put into your defence they should be short and sharp. No long rambling paragraphs going into painful detail. You can expand on your points later on

Coupon-mad

Trying to understand, did the Garage contract PCM there?

And you left the car where the Garage told you to, thereby varying any contract about a 'restricted' area, because it was agreed you could park the car there.

You can argue that the charge can only be an unconscionable and predatory penalty and can be fully distinguished from the 'agreed contractual charge' in ParkingEye v Beavis.

I've now done some more research (including going to the site and taking pictures). It looks like the entire road is owned by Network Rail and therefore may not be enforceable by PCN, or at the very least I think PoFA 2012 might not apply in my case?

That's relevant if you never appealed as driver, and have decided not to say who was driving.

But I think you need to decide which stance to take. In your case it MIGHT be better to defend at the hearing as an honest driver, with clear evidence, than pretend you don't know.

Lamilad

Mui, the OP parked in a nearby (unrelated) p&d car park, and it was the garage who moved it to the location where it was ticketed by PCM.

it MIGHT be better to defend at the hearing as an honest driver,!

OP was not driver and has already named the garage as the liable party to PCM's DCA - Trace Management thus discharging liability under PoFA.

Coupon-mad

OK, that's what I couldn't glean from the posts, but I do skim-read!

I thought it was ticketed where the OP parked it.

foofcat

@ Lamilad - you've beat me to it, that's exactly what I was about to say.

@Coupon-Mad Not only did tell them which garage I took it to, but also the "contravention" was photographed by PCM has happening literally outside the entrance to the garage so it really wouldn't have been difficult for them to know who to speak to once I told them the garage had it for the day.

How ever many points you put into your defence they should be short and sharp. No long rambling paragraphs going into painful detail. You can expand on your points later on

I've written six pages!! And I think it it's not as concise as it could be. The paragraphs are too long but I think I've scrubbed it of unnecessary / painful detail. Is there a safe way to share with you without the PPE and their solicitors snooping? I've based the byelaw 14 issue around POFA's definition of "relevant land." It says that Schedule 4 only applies on relevant land which excludes "land that is governed by statutory law"... aka Byelaw 14. Hope I've not misunderstood that?

I'm going to go through all the suggestions above after I've had a rest (especially the Beavis stuff, thanks Coupon-Mad) and see if I can thread it in somehow.

I know I keep saying this but thank you all so much for the advice and help - it's made something overwhelming into something just about manageable

Lamilad

!Is there a safe way to share with you without the PPE and their solicitors snooping

Post it here to get as much feedback as poss from the many knowledgeable forum regulars.

No need to worry about pcm seeing it, they'll see it soon enough anyway