Claim form issued - Gladstones / HX Car Park Management LTD PCN

Skyboss

Witness Statement


Claim Number xxx

xxx (Claimant) v xxx (Defendant)

xxx
xxx
Post Code

Dated xxx


1. I am the registered keeper of the vehicle xxx


2. I was not the driver of the vehicle on 16/05/17.


3. The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. Where they are not within my personal knowledge, they are true to the best of my knowledge.


4. I request that xxx attend and act as my lay representative.


5. 16/05/17, the vehicle xxx was parked in the xxx Car Park whilst visiting xxx Restaurant. Patrons of xxx were allowed free parking after 18:00hrs.


6. 28/07/17, I received a letter before claim from Gladstones solicitors. Copy enclosed for reference, page 9. I had received no correspondence prior to this.


7. 07/08/17, I responded in writing to Gladstones requesting full details of the parking charge to which they were referring.


8. 30/08/17 Gladstones responded to my letter 07/08/17 but failed to address questions such as how the parking charge had been calculated, explanation of the letter before claim and also misunderstood other elements of my letter. Copy of my letter and Gladstones response are enclosed, page 10 & page 11/12 respectively. Gladstones enclosed a copy of the Notice to Keeper dated 30/05/17, a Notification Letter to Keeper dated 28/06/17 and a final demand notice dated 13/07/17. Pages 14,15,16.


9. 14/09/17, I responded to their letter of 30/08/17 and addressed their points and also asked that Gladstones address my original points and questions. Copy letter attached, page 18/19.
I received no response to my letter.


10. 24/09/17, I received a claim form. Copy enclosed, page 17.


11. 31/10/17, I received a further letter from Gladstones advising that they had notified the court of their clients intention to proceed with the claim. They stated that they had enclosed a completed Directions Questionnaire, however, the Directions Questionnaire had not been completed, it was completely blank in all sections. They also stated that their client had elected not to mediate. A request for special direction pursuant to PD27(2.4) was also enclosed. Copies enclosed, pages 20-24.


12. The Protection of Freedom Act (PoFA) 2012, Schedule 4 has not been complied with:
A number of elements of this schedule have not been adhered to, including but not limited to the fact that the registered keeper has not been proven as the driver.

a) The Claimant has not proven their case, they have shown no evidence that the registered keeper was the driver. This is because they cannot, because the registered keeper was not the driver.

b) Notice to Keeper date of notice is 30/05/17, this could not have been delivered to / received by the defendant within 14 days beginning with the day after the that on which the specified period of parking ended (16/05/17). Contrary to PoFA 2012, Schedule 4, paragraph 9,4,b & 9,5.

c) Notice to Keeper does not warn the keeper that, if after 28 days beginning with with the day after that on which the notice is given, the creditor will have the right to recover from the keeper if the creditor does not know both the name and current address for service for the driver. Contrary to PoFA 2012, Schedule 4, paragraph 9,2,f. (page 25/26 for ref.)


13. There are several contraventions of the International Parking Community (IPC) Code of Practice. Xxx Car Park xxx is a registered member of the IPC.

a)Notice to Keeper (page 14) does not state that the Creditor does not know the name and current address for service of the driver, contrary to IPC Code of Practice, Part C, 5.1(f), nor does it identify the Creditor. Only how and whom to pay are mentioned, contrary to Part C, 5.1(j). (page 27).

b) Notice to Keeper only states Should the registered keeper either provide us with an unserviceable name and address of the driver or if the named driver denies they were the driver, we may pursue the registered keeper for any Parking Charge amount that remains outstanding on the assumption that they were the driver. Copy enclosed, page14.

c) Notice to Keeper date of notice is 30/05/17, this could not have been delivered to / received by the defendant within 14 days beginning with the day after the specified period of parking (16/05/17). Contrary to IPC Code of Practice, Part C,6. Notice to Keeper. 5.1,m. (page 27).

d) Notification Letter to Keeper (page 15) does not advise that the keeper is liable for the charge nor does it offer the keeper a minimum of 14 days to pay. The document makes reference to the driver only on both counts, Contrary to IPC Code of Practice, Part C, 6. Sending a Notification Letter to Keeper, 6.1 & 6.3. (page 28)

e) The entrance sign mentions terms and conditions and lists them but does not go on to mention all of the terms and conditions. It references the sign at the pay & display machine for full terms & conditions. The pay & display sign does not contain full terms and conditions, there is only reference to full terms & conditions. This is contrary to the IPC Code of Practice, Part E, Schedule 1 - Signage, Entrance Signs. Copy enclosed, page 29/30.

f) I do not believe that signs drawing the recent change of restrictions to the attention of drivers relying upon the free after 18:00hrs condition were in place on the 16/05/17, contrary to IPC Code of Practice, part E, Schedule 1 - Signage, Changes in Operators Terms and Conditions. Copy enclosed, page 31.

g) The text size of the entrance signage means that it is not readable by a motorist in a moving vehicle, or at the very best not easily read contrary to IPC Code of Practice, Part E, schedule 1 - Signage, Text size. Copy enclosed, page 30. Photograph, page 32.
Signage is not clearly legible and placed in such position that a driver is able to clearly see them on entering and parking a vehicle, contrary to IPC Codes of Practice, Part E, Schedule 1, signage, Other Signs, condition 4. Example of signage where the vehicle was parked, page 37/38. This sign is fixed to a wall some 7ft 10inch (236cm) high (measured from pavement to bottom of the sign).

h) Signage does not contain text appropriate to position and relative position of the person who is reading it, this is particularly apparent with the entrance sign and repeater signs around the car park. Pages 32,37,38, contrary to IPC Codes of Practice, Part E, Schedule 1 - signage, Other Signs, condition 6. Copy enclosed, page 31.


14. No evidence has been provided that a valid ticket was not purchased. Photographs of the keepers vehicle entering and exiting the car park do not constitute a proven contravention of the parking conditions. The Claimant has failed to provide any evidence that a valid ticket was not on display.

I believe that these facts stated in this witness statement are true.

Coupon-mad

This needs to be #1:

3. The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. Where they are not within my personal knowledge, they are true to the best of my knowledge.

You do not need this at all, your lay rep CAN just attend with you & speak for you, on the day (best tip is they carry a copy of this, in case they think he's just a McKenzie friend):

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1999/1225/made

4. I request that xxx attend and act as my lay representative.

Lamilad

Add a sub para to #13 saying that the supreme court judges in the beavis case found that the cop is effectively "binding" regulation on the operator. Think it was para 111 of beavis but you'd best check first

Lamilad

I had received no correspondence prior to this.

You could add a para about HX's known practice of not sending documents. Refer to HX Car Park Management Ltd vs Tax and Accounts Ltd D2GF629A, on 15th March 2018, at Bradford Combined Court where Deputy District Judge Healy made a finding that HX had not sent any documents to the defendant prior to starting procedings. This was despite them adducing copies of several letters into evidence they said they had sent.

DDJ Healy stated that just because they had copies of the letters this didn't prove they had posted them, and as they had not provided any proof of postage such as a post office receipt or records from a mailing system, the court must agree with the defendant's submission that it had not received any correspondance.

Coupon-mad

And here's a case where a poster won on 'no keeper liability' v HX, the Defendant explained the omission well to the Judge:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/73805827#Comment_73805827

HTH

Skyboss

YES! We won!!!!

Went to court this morning, it only took 15 mins, what a great feeling what a relief!

I've put together a summary of what happened but just wanted to check that I'm ok to post without redacting? Can I quote the Claimant's witness statement for example?

nosferatu1001

Yep its all a matter of public record

Case number coutr judges name etc are all great

I hope you got costs!
And well done

Coupon-mad

Well done! Please tell us which Judge (name), Court, and claim number.

Can I quote the Claimant's witness statement for example?

Yes please do, it's fine.

Waiting with baited breath for the latest winning court report, tell us all of it, how you felt, how it went from the moment you arrived, and did you get your costs?

System

Can I quote the Claimant's witness statement for example?

As Coupon says. Courts are public record apart from where you are instructed by a judge not to say anything. Can't see a judge wanting to spare Gladstones/HX from more public shame.

Lamilad

Fantastic, well done. Like all the others I'm looking forward to that report.