Apr issued ticket that i ignored that has gone to claim stage from northampton county court business

blackjew

Hi all ,
first thing i would like to thank this website and all the contributors for all the work that has been put into this forum, this site has been a goldmine for myself in the past dealing with these parking tickets. but i've hit a stumbling block at present let me explain...

in July of 2017 i entered a privately owned car park at a retail park in a area of the midlands. To be honest the only reason the driver did was because we was lost and needed to pull off a heavily congested ring road to make a call to clarify the directions and set my satnav. at no time did we leave the car and to be honest on a normal day that process would have taken us 5 minutes max . but because of the heavy traffic and roadworks that obstructed exiting in a fluid manner it has stated that my actual time was 14 minutes. now i was always in the pretence that a 10 minute grace was to be given and in previous times this has happened while yes they have contacted us eventually they have gone away. But this one has become a cancer to the point they have taken it to small claims. No doubt many of you guys will say if you read the forum the answers are there but i'm going to admit the stress and dyslexia is getting the better of me. i've read numerous posts and recommendations regarding this type of ticket and still cant find the right solution and method to attack this .
so far i'm up to the stage of acknowledgement on the money claim website , ive requested the 28 days to put together my case . but i'm stuck. Can somebody help me at this stage or have we messed up our chances? please help.....

Castle

A 13 minute stay won at court last week:-
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5757012/minster-baywatch

blackjew

so the newbie #2 is what i need to concentrate on to find the sufficient info to beat this case?

KeithP

That's right.

Redx

and any similar and recent court claim threads that are ongoing and also concluded, especially if they are ahead of you, but that post #2 of the NEWBIES sticky thread is your "bible"

anytime you ask something already covered in there , people will refer you back to it , so always look there first

do not assume that you are the only person in this boat, and do not assume you are the first person to be in said boat , the boat is full to overflowing already

Coupon-mad

Which PPC, and is the claim from a solicitor on their behalf, if so, which?

nosferatu1001

Edit your first post. If youve ignored then you havent told them the drivers details, but you do in this post.

blackjew

the claimant is civil enforcement ltd , if that makes sense
while trying to digest the newbie section i remember reading a case were a guy states that there is a certain time allowed for pcn to be issued after any alleged incidents? is this a factor i can put into my notes

Coupon-mad

What notes? This will be simple, no notes or writing something yourself...not really. The NEWBIES thread gives you a template CEL defence, as do any other CEL defence threads, like the ones yesterday, and the day before...read the forum. Copy one!

A child copying in crayon would win a CEL case, they are that easy to defend. No hearings, no losses.

blackjew

Hi all , so ive read through the cases in the newbie section but still im struggling to find a case that matches mine.
I decided to revisit the site of the alleged incident and noticed they have made a lot of changes ie added more signs , i did notice they still have the main sign on the left of the entrance on a 1 way street that you have to enter the carpark from the right.

but will these changes affect and give them the power to contest in regards to things like

6. In the absence of any proof of adequate signage contractually bound the Defendant then there can have been no contract and the Claimant has no case

a. The Claimant is put to strict proof at the time of the alleged event they had both advertisement consent and the permission from the site owner to display the signs

b. In the absence of strict proof I submit that the Claimant was committing an offence by displaying their signs and therefore no contract could have been entered into between the driver and the Claimant

c. Inadequate signs incapable of binding the driver !!!8211; this distinguishes this case from the Beavis case:

i. Sporadic and illegible (charge not prominent nor large lettering) of site/entrance signage - breach of the POFA 2012 Schedule 4 and the BPA Code of Practice and no contract formed to pay any clearly stated sum
ii. It is believed the signage was not lit and any terms were not transparent or legible; this is an unfair contract, not agreed by the driver and contrary to the Consumer Rights Act 2015 in requiring a huge inflated sum as !!!8220;compensation!!!8221; from by an authorised party using the premises as intended
iii. No promise was made by the driver that could constitute consideration because there was no offer known nor accepted. No consideration flowed from the Claimant
iv. The signs are believed to have no mention of any debt collection additional charge, which cannot form part of any alleged contract.
v. The signs are believed to have no mention of any debt collection additional charge, which cannot form part of any alleged contract.

beamerguy

And please don't forget what the BPA's ANDREW PESTER
said about ANPR ????

He is the CEO of the BPA so he must know what he
is talking about .... surely ????

ANPR IS NOT 100% ACCURATE

And that also means CEL

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5833463/bbc-watchdog-for-those-who-missed-it-regarding-anpr&highlight=bbc+watchdog