County court claim

Redx

harrrymischa wrote: »

Thank you


I've made the amendments and taken out the irrelevant.

either post the WS again, OR edit the last one to your current version, for clarity and any further critique

harrrymischa

This is my final I submitted yesterday.

In the xxxxx County Court
Claim No: xxxxxxx
between

UK CAR PARK MANAGEMENT LIMITED
and
MISS xxxxxxxxx

---

Witness Statement

---

I am Miss xxx of xxxxxxx, the defendant in this matter. Where I refer to information supplied by others, the source of the information is identified; facts and matters derived from other sources are true to the best of my knowledge and belief. I will say as follows:

1. On the 25th August 2016 I decided to go for dinner at the xxxxxxxx. I parked in the customer car park with my sister as a passenger. We spent approximately 2 hours and 30 minutes eating and drinking with a mutual friend in the xxxxxxxxxx. I did not use my card to pay for any goods on site as my sister was in debt to me so paid for my meal. At page 5 of HM1 is a bank statement from my sister showing proof of our visit.

2. I left the xxxxxxxxxx with my sister at around 9.45pm on the 25/08/2016. As I did not see the signage I would like to bring to your attention that the signage on site is not lit. At page 6 of HM1 is a copy of my car in transit from the carpark provided by UK car park management showing how dark it was at the time I left the site.


3. As the alleged breach happened in August 2016 I have no proof of the signs displayed at the time the breach occurred. The claimant has also failed to provide evidence of the signage at the time of the incident. A great quantity of changes can happen over 2 years, one of which was the font used. Page 7 of HM1 is a screenshot of the xxxxxxxxx manager Paul xxxx confirming changes to the signage since it was erected.

4. On Page 8 of HM1 I have attached a copy of page 23 of the independent Parking Committee’s Code of practice of which the claimant is an accredited member. The claimant states the signage has been audited and approved by the ‘IPC’ I believe this statement is false. In order to be an accredited member of the IPC, compliance with the COP is compulsory. The IPC COP states that:

“Text used on signage should be of such a size and in a font that can be easily read by a motorist having regard to the likely position of the motorist in relation to the sign.

“If parking enforcement takes place outside of daylight hours you should ensure that signs are illuminated or there is sufficient other lighting. You will need to ensure all signs are readable during the hours of enforcement as they form the legal basis of any charge.”

On Page 9 and 10 of HM1 I have attached photographic evidence that signs are not illuminated and there is no sufficient other lighting. The claimant has stated signage is prominent throughout the parking area so I have attached my route of entrance and where I parked on the day On Page 11 of HM1. On Page 12 and 13 of HM1 I have also provided evidence of what can be seen from a driver’s point of view when entering the car park.

5. The claimant has provided evidence of the contract for the provision of ANPR parking enforcement dated and signed by the xxxxxxxx manager Paul xxxxxx on 27/05/2016. The date I parked at the site in question was 25/08/2016. At Page 14 of HM1 is a screenshot of the xxxxxxxx Facebook page showing the date of the changes to the parking actually started on 13/07/2016, just weeks before my visit and unbeknown to me and my sister, and we certainly did not have this change drawn to our intention Lord Denning's 'Red Hand Rule' should apply. It is misleading and disingenuous of the Claimant to suggest the regulations changed months before, when they did not. Under Lord Denning's Red Hand Rule, the signage should have been effectively: 'in red letters with a red hand pointing to it' in other words very clear and prominent with the terms in large lettering.

6. At page 26 of HM1 is a photograph taken from the same place I parked my car on the day.

7. Upon receipt of a parking charge notice from the claimant, I asked the claimant to supply further evidence, however they have elected to pursue this matter via litigation. At page 15 and 16 of HM1 is a copy of my letter for further information following receipt of the parking charge notice. At page 17 and 18 of HM1 is a copy of the response I received from UK car park management with no response to any of my requests for further information. Section 5 of the Protocol, Disclosure of Documents states:-
“5.1 Early disclosure of documents and relevant information can help to clarify or resolve any issues in dispute. Where any aspect of the debt is disputed (including the amount, interest, charges, time for payment, or the creditor’s compliance with relevant statutes and regulations), the parties should exchange information and disclose documents sufficient to enable them to understand each other’s position.”

8. At no point in all correspondence from UK car park management was it explained to me that the onsite businesses in this case the xxxxxx could very easily canceled this charge, apparently with one email. On page 19 of HM1 I have attached an email from the managers at the xxxxxxxx showing as the case had been passed on to debt collectors they cannot help therefore I was too late for them to cancel the charge. On page 25 of HM1 I have attached a copy of the consumer protection from unfair trading regulations 2008 Page 5 referencing ‘Misleading Omissions’. This refers to UK car park management withholding information regarding the route of cancellation which is a breach of CPTUR 2008.

9. The claimant is known to be serial issuers of generic claims with no due diligence, no scrutiny of details nor even checking for true cause of actions. The claimant has submitted completely generic and non-specific evidence. The claimant has advised and I quote “my company doesn’t dispute the defendant may have paid for parking”. If the claimant had actually visited the site in question or researched the basis for this claim they would realise there is no option to pay on site.

10. The claimant has also filed incorrect evidence and also breached The EU General Data Protection Regulation by submitting a letter from another case with sensitive information regarding someone else’s parking charge number, vehicle registration, name and address please see iv) Notices of GSL1 documents.

11. The claimant has also submitted points of the car park where signs are present however has marked 3 points on the map where no signs are present therefore the claimants defence is incorrect. I have marked on page 20 of HM1 where it shows where the claimant has advised there was a sign. Page 21, 22 and 23 of HM1 shows a picture of that site in question with no signs present. The claimants deal with private parking issues every single day of the week there can be no excuses for these perpetual mistakes.

12. This initial parking charge notice of £100.00 now stands at £256.66. Apart from properly incurred court fees this is a breach of the protection of freedoms act 2012 schedule 4 where it does not permit the claimant to recover a sum greater than the amount specified in the notice to keeper. page 24 of HM1 I have attached a copy of the protection of freedoms act 2012 schedule 4 where it states this.

Statement of Truth

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.

Signature:
Date:

harrrymischa

I have drafted my Cost schedule does this sound ok?


Also, I didn't receive a received receipt from Gladstone's from sending my WS is this normal?


I've seen that I can submit a skeleton argument? If im honest I haven't got anymore time to do anything else so if I don't have to do this I would rather I didn't!




IN THE


CLAIM NO: XXXXXXXX



BETWEEN:-




Claimant


And


XXXXXXXX


Defendant


__________________________________________________


DEFENDANT’S SCHEDULE OF COSTS


FOR THE HEARING XXXXXXXX



Ordinary Costs

Loss of earnings/leave (1 day leave), incurred through attendance at Court XXXXXXXX £17.70 x 7 hours = £123.90

Return mileage from home address to Court – 4 miles x £0.45 = £1.80

Parking near Court 2-3 hours = £7.00

Sub-total £132.70 ======

Further costs for Claimant's unreasonable behavior, pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 27.14(2)(g)

Research, preparation and drafting of documents (£17.70 per hour):


16/09/2016-18/09/2016: 6 hours of research and drafting a response to claimants parking charge notice: £106.20


25/06/2018-05/07/2018: 20 hours of research and drafting defense: £354.00


20/11/2018-25/11/2018: 15 hours of research and drafting Witness statement: £265.50


Stationery: £3.70


Printing: £14.50


Postage: £3.25

Sub-total £747.15 ======




£879.85 TOTAL COSTS CLAIMED

Umkomaas

Max loss of earnings/annual leave for half a day only = £95 (take pay slips to hearing as proof).

Litigant-in-person rate where unreasonable behaviour on the part of the Claimant is proven (high bar) £19 per hour.

Coupon-mad

I didn't receive a received receipt from Gladstone's from sending my WS is this normal?

Yes if you didn't send a read receipt.

Print out your sent item as proof of sending, and send Gs the WS with a read receipt now.

harrrymischa

Thanks everyone I have my pack ready for today.. payslips, defence, witness statement, receipts etc etc...

I forgot to send my schedule of costs can I bring it with me today?

Also I know this might sound silly but I have no idea what to expect today!! Will I be reading our my defence and WS?? Or will I just be asked questions? Have no idea

KeithP

Look at this short video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n93eoaxhzpU

Yes, of course take your costs schedule with you.

harrrymischa

Hi Everyone,


just want to say.. I WON!!!!


The judge called me in and said it was typical to see no one from Gladstone's had come to the hearing and seemed annoyed by it and then said he would be striking out the claim as he had not received any defence or witness statement from the claimants. he asked if I had seen their defence and WS I said yes but he wasn't phased and just said well I haven't. He said even though he is striking out the case he said things like this could rear their heads if Gladstone's claim they sent all the information with proof so he said just be warned it COULD be reopened.


I then asked to submit my schedule of costs and he was a bit surprised and said I could only claim £90 but I showed him my draft and he awarded me with £129 to be paid by Gladstone's by 19th December,
Whoop!


Couldn't of done it without the help of everyone on here so thank you again!!

beamerguy

Well done harrrymischa :T

Gladstones wasting the courts time again

Why don't the courts do something about these clowns ??

The_Deep

he was a bit surprised and said I could only claim £90

Did you not press him on unreasonable behaviour costs? They wasted court time, (and your own), putting you to all that work, dragging you to court, failing to submit documents, not turning up. If that is not unreasonable I do not know what is.