Incomplete vrn entered

Pjr1525

http://imgur.com/a/ax614Ah Photos supplied with w/s

Pjr1525

I would appreciate any help with my W/S. it has to be posted off by the 10th. Thanks

Pjr1525

Below is a rough draft of my witness statement. All photo exhibits mentioned, clearly show the before and after signs that were added. I would appreciate any help regarding wording or points that I have missed. Regards.

In the County Court at Xxxxxxxx
Claim No xxxxxxx
Between
HX car park management ( claimant )
And
Xxxxxxxxx ( Defendant)

Witness Statement

1. Am xxxxxxxxx of xxxxxxxxxxx, the defendant in this matter. I will say as follows:

2.On xxxxxxxx I visited the car park in xxxxxxxx and parked my car.

3.There is a large sign ( exhibit a ) between the 2 pay points clearly showing the tariffs, which I read, agreed with, and then entered sufficient vrn to identify my vehicle and purchased a ticket ( exhibit b ) which I displayed on my dashboard.

4.I returned within the paid for time and left the car park.

5.One week later I received a PCN from the claimant demanding £100 for breach of contract. I sent proof that I had paid, in the form of the ticket, which showed that the number, as required in point 2 of their condition of use on the point of sale, had been entered, but they rejected my proof and after several intimidating letters demanding increasing amounts of money, and have elected to pursue the matter via litigation.

6. On entering the car park the first point on the main sign (exhibit c) states ‘Full terms and conditions at ticket machine’ thus removing the need to look elsewhere in the car park for the full terms and conditions.
Unfortunately, when I arrived at the ticket machine, there were no such ‘Full terms and conditions’ just four brief conditions of use in small writing on the actual ticket machine. I discovered at a later date that the nearest full terms and conditions are on a small sign with very small writing some distance away above head-height on a wall.

7.All of the conditions that were on the ticket machine were complied with in full. Point 2 requires that the vehicle registration number is entered, the number within my vehicle registration is xx which was entered in full.

i.The claimant has realised at some point after the material date that the requirement for vehicle registration number to be entered is unclear ( exhibit d ) and that letters as well as numbers are required and they have added a new sign ( exhibit e ) on the same ticket machine correcting the existing condition, now stating that all characters, meaning both numbers and letters, must be entered full and exact.

ii.Paragraphs 37 and 38 of the consumer protection act ( exhibit f ) requires that any ambiguity in a contract must favour the consumer.
It it my position that under the doctrine of contra proferentem ( exhibit g )the claimant has no standing or cause of action to litigate in this matter.

iii.Also breach of contract cannot be claimed when a term or condition is added retrospectively as in case law Thornton v Shoe lane (exhibit h )

iv.At no point, on the material date, either, at the point of the transaction (especially), or elsewhere in the car park does the claimant make it clear that: if you fail to enter all characters from your vehicle registration plate you agree to pay £100.

v. I also contend that the requirement to enter any details from the registration plate are not sufficiently displayed around the car park, the claimant has realised this and added a new prominent sign on the actual pdt machine”


8.The main sign at the entrance, on the material date, ( exhibit j ) did not state the mandatory information that ANPR was in use and that it would be used for enforcement purposes. The claimant has, in effect, acknowledged this omission by subsequently adding a prominent sign to the existing sign ( exhibit g ) which now includes the previously missing mandatory information regarding the use of ANPR.

9. The purpose of requiring vehicle registration details to be entered into the pay and display ticket machine is so that it can be established that the patron has paid for the parking space, and not for the claimant to use failure as a reason to invoke breach of contract and thus generate unfair revenue for themselves.

i.As well as my providing proof of payment in the form of the ticket, the claimant have their own records and it is their gift to cross reference the ANPR images with records from the pay and display ticket machine, which according to their own website is done by trained staff, to ascertain if there is a close match in the car park who has paid.

ii.I have requested a list from the claimant’s solicitor, of partially redacted vehicle registration plates taken by ANPR on the material date, as proof that their was no other vehicle in that small car park with the partial vrn xxxx, and also a copy of payments taken in and kept by the ticket machine, as proof that the correct tariff was paid for vehicle xxxx, and that the claimant’s staff were well aware that the payment for xxxx related to vehicle xxxxxxx, but this information has not been supplied at date of this statement. ( Exhibit k ).

10.I invite the court to dismiss this claim in it’s entirety, and to award my costs of attendance at the hearing such as are allowable pursuant to CPR 27.14.

Statement of truth.

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

Signed xxxxxxxx

Ibcus

I can't comment on how good the WS is, I'll leave that for more knowledgeable people.


I did spot a couple of typo's I think

1. Am xxxxxxxxx of xxxxxxxxxxx,

1. I am ???

ii.Paragraphs 37 and 38 of the consumer protection act ( exhibit f ) requires that any ambiguity in a contract must favour the consumer.
It it my position that under the doctrine of contra proferentem ( exhibit g )the claimant has no standing or cause of action to litigate in this matter.

It is my position

Could you not add that the ticket printed by the PD machines mentions nothing of a vehicle registration number but simply states M/C so there was no way you could be aware the ticket wasn't validated as they required albeit the signage at the time didn't require it to be?


Or would that be better used in court in front of a judge?

Pjr1525

Hi ibcus. Not sure I can mention about M/C on ticket as it wasn't in my defence. Thanks for pointing out typos, I will sit down and proof read it all this Sunday, the W/S has to be posted off on Monday to reach court and Gladstones by deadline. Regards.

Pjr1525

Wow! Received Gladstone's W/S today, 41 pages! Makes my 3 pages look puny. A few omissions, one possible own goal. Can't reproduce all 41 pages but will try and list some points. Regards.

beamerguy

Pjr1525 wrote: »

Wow! Received Gladstone's W/S today, 41 pages! Makes my 3 pages look puny. A few omissions, one possible own goal. Can't reproduce all 41 pages but will try and list some points. Regards.

41 pages ???? Do you realise how much a REAL solicitor would charge for 41 pages ? For this cheap skate solicitor, they have already lost money.

There you go, Gladstones still trying to prove to their scammers something ??

Does size matter ???? don't think so, would a judge even bother reading through 41 pages knowing the rubbish Gladstones come out with .... 3 pages that comes to the point is perfect.

Be interesting to see in points ....

Pjr1525

Hi Beamer. A rough draft of my own W/S is post 221 with pictures 222. Gladstones/HX have sent everything to the court including correspondence between myself and HX, except my 8 page rebuttal of their LBC. Which apparently doesn't exist! ( registered post ).

They did, however, obligingly include a letter that I sent to the DPO of HX which apart from other things cited and quoted a parallel court case in Staines CC where the DJ dismissed all other arguments because it was proven that a ticket had been purchased, as in my case. Regards.

Coupon-mad

Pjr1525 wrote: »

Wow! Received Gladstone's W/S today, 41 pages! Makes my 3 pages look puny. A few omissions, one possible own goal. Can't reproduce all 41 pages but will try and list some points. Regards.

Do you have a court outcome yet, or any concerns about an impending hearing? Done your costs schedule and filed/served it in advance?

The_Deep

Surely a judge would think that 41 pages is a tad OTT for a minor dispute over the price of a Chinese takeaway for four.

It sounds unreasonable imo, acquaint yourself with unreasonable behaviour costs OP.

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part27

and, if you have not already dfone so, complain to your MP.