Judgment for Claimant (Default)

AMTF

I had my hearing, and won

waamo

AMTF wrote: »

I had my hearing, and won

Brilliant can you give a report to help others in the same situation please?

AMTF

I received a barebones claim in August, with the only evidence being a copy of the signs displayed in the area. 7 days before the hearing I received the claim in full, which had a longer and more detailed Witness Statement, and several pages more evidence, including full pictures of the car and where it was parked, sign locations, and a letter confirming that the claimant had an agreement with the freeholder to manage the land. Having received this so late meant we only had less than a week to get a full Defence together.

When the hearing started the judge said it was unusual as the Witness Statement was for the final trial for the case, whereas the time booked was only 30 minutes. We ended up there for 3 hours in the end.

Based on all the extra info in the Witness Statement, the only parts of the POFA 2012 that weren't followed was a missing period of time of the offence (there was only a timestamp on the letters/PCN) and a missing discount on the Notice to Keeper. This alone, however, wasn't enough to get the claim dismissed.

The reason the claim got dismissed was the signage used at the location. The main part of the sign that forms a contract is the wording "You agree to pay consideration in the form of a parking charge in the sum of" etc., and this wording is the second smallest on the sign. In the location where the offence occurred, the signs are 12ft off the ground. We made the defence that with the signs being so high it is not immediately obvious they are there, and when they are they can't be clearly read. (This is probably unique to this case as the signs were originally lower but had to be put higher as they kept being removed and vandalised by the residents).

The judge dismissed the claim on the grounds that the signs are not clearly legable and ordered that my set aside fee be paid, as well as loss of earnings for the day in court.

DoaM

AMTF wrote: »

the only parts of the POFA 2012 that weren't followed was a missing period of time of the offence (there was only a timestamp on the letters/PCN) and a missing discount on the Notice to Keeper. This alone, however, wasn't enough to get the claim dismissed..

Some would argue that ANY failure to meet POFA 2012 should lead to a dismissal of the claim. After all, POFA 2012 is a legal requirement on the claimant, thus failure to meet it is a breach of the law.

Congratulations anyway

Umkomaas

Great stuff AMTF. A monkey off your back.

The_Deep

Did you not ask the judge for unreasonable behaviour costs? They wanted £280+ costs which were totally unreasonable imo. You should have done the same.

Have you complained to your MP about this waste of your time?

Coupon-mad

Great to read this and no wonder the residents were removing the scam signs! PPCs have no place whatsoever anywhere, but especially NOT in someone's home car park, operating a protection racket.

Signage issues often win cases, unsurprisingly. Well done, another one bites the dust!

Which court and Judge, and why did he take so long (3 hrs) to suss the scam?

AMTF

The judge said the only cos costs they cover in court are for loss of earnings on the day of court. I only got the set aside fee back because I had applied for it at the set aside and they weren't there to contest it (the judge left it open). They tried to argue that they followed all the court processes so I wasn't entitled to get the fee back. It was only because I could show the judge I had asked for the fee back that I actually got it.

It was in the Uxbridge court, I can't remember the name of the judge. It was scheduled for 30 minutes because the judge was unaware it was a full final hearing. He asked if we were happy to go on as a full trial, and we all said yes. The claimant went through all the points in their witness statement, then went though my defence. We gave our side and went through all the points that weren't in our original defence (as we did not have all the evidence). The claimant had another say then we were asked if there was anything else.

Gladstones emailed for my bank details, so now I just need to wait for that to come in

AMTF

And also, thank you for all your help!

Coupon-mad

Just shows the importance of making sure the set aside Judge confirms the £255 set aside fee is reserved (including that the Claimant must pay it if they discontinue).