UKCPM Windscreen PCN

tank4228

Also here is my WS. I invite anything you guys would include/change...

In the County Court at Bristol

Claim No. *********

Between

UK CAR PARK MANAGEMENT LIMITED (Claimant)

and

NAME (Defendant)

Witness Statement

 

1.       I, NAME, the Defendant in this matter, states that what is written in this witness statement is a true account of the event which occurred on 20th May 2018.

 

2.       On 20TH MAY 2018, the driver of the vehicle in question, registration number XXXXXXX, parked within the car park of the venue at SGS WISE CAMPUS, STOKE GIFFORD, BRISTOL, BS34 8LP. The venue was hosting a Table Tennis tournament event on this day.

 

3.       The driver was a participant at this event. Prior to arriving, the driver had registered for a reduced parking rate, which had been agreed between the event organisers and SGS WISE CAMPUS, where players would pay £5 for a full day of parking in the venue car park. A receipt for the paid parking can be seen in Exhibit A.

 

4.       There were no other requirements to the reduced parking agreement, such as the reason of why the parking charge notice (PCN) was given ‘No Parking Outside of a Designated Area’.

 

5.       Upon receiving the windscreen PCN, the defendant contacted the landowner, in this case an employee of SGS WISE CAMPUS, to gain written confirmation of the reduced parking rate, establishing the claimant had no cause for action as permission from the landowner had been given to park, not in accordance with the Claimant’s ‘Contract’. The written confirmation can be viewed in Exhibit B.

 

6.       As the driver was adhering to the reduced parking rate agreement and not the Claimant’s ‘contract’, there was no need for the driver to seek out any signage stating the ‘terms and conditions’ of parking within the car park.

 

7.       In addition, I refer to the Defendant’s Defence, section 5, the driver used to attend SGS WISE CAMPUS, as a college student, between the years of 2011 – 2013. During this period, there was no need to ‘pay and display’ as the car park was not ‘managed’ and there weren’t any restrictions on parking in ‘designated area’s’.

 

8.       I invite the Court to dismiss this claim in its entirety, and to award costs, as stipulated in the ‘Defendant’s Schedule of Costs’, to the defendant, such as are allowable pursuant to CPR 27.14.

 

I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

KeithP

Nothing in there about Abuse of Process?

That was mentioned at the time you were writing your Defence.

tank4228

KeithP said:

Nothing in there about Abuse of Process

Yes, only reason I left this out was due to recent decisions on hearings, I've read on this forum, where abuse of process wasn't even mentioned by the judge but the decision was still given to the defendant

KeithP

tank4228 said:

KeithP said:

Nothing in there about Abuse of Process

Yes, only reason I left this out was due to recent decisions on hearings, I've read on this forum, where abuse of process wasn't even mentioned by the judge by the decision was still given to the defendant

Of course if the Defendant wins there is no need to bother the Court about Abuse of Process matters.

The point of the AoP issue is twofold:
1) to reduce the amount of the claim should the Claimant win, and
2) to bring to the court's attention the abuses that the Claimant is making of the court process.

Le_Kirk

tank4228 said:

I'm writing up my WS and schedule of costs but at this point, I don't yet know if my hearing will by via phone or postponed for an attended hearing. Should I still send my schedule of costs through with my WS or wait to find out what type of hearing it will be and then send it? 
Reason I ask, there will be more costs incurred if I need to attend court rather than taking a call at home. I wouldn't want to be needlessly out of pocket. 

It's now referred to as a Summary Cost Assessment and, as it is an assessment, it could be changed after the facts are known, just go with it as if you are attending court.  If you get a telephone/video hearing, the judge will adjust it when you win.

tank4228

Nice one! I shall rename the document and add in court costs. Much appreciated

tank4228

KeithP said:

Of course if the Defendant wins there is no need to bother the Court about Abuse of Process matters.

The point of the AoP issue is twofold:
1) to reduce the amount of the claim should the Claimant win, and
2) to bring to the court's attention the abuses that the Claimant is making of the court process.

OK! I will add something regarding AoP too 👍

Coupon-mad

Your WS is good, nice and concise and with good evidence, but in the telephone hearings thread (in the post where I suggested a particular email to send) I gave examples of court bundles (i.e. sets of documents for court). 

Both show a supplementary witness statement about the abuse of process so it's there to copy and use...why would anyone NOT include that important argument and the judgments about the added £60?  You can append the Soton 6 page approved judgment plus other one page Orders from Warwick, Skipton, Luton, Caernarfon...take your pick but YOU MUST attack the false added £60!   

Also, have you had UKCPM's own WS yet?  Signed by 'Jack Chapman' like in all the other UKCPM threads telling you to attack that facsimile signature, too?

The aim is for your Judge to strike the claim out...that's why you attack their conduct, in a well argued way.

tank4228

I will go back and add the supplementary WS to my bundle. 
I've just received the claimant's WS with the 'Jack Chapman' signature which I will also include. 
Some aspects of their WS I just want to raise with you guys...
1. 'My Company would like the Court to note that the Defendant is using a generic

defence which can be found on the internet and it is highly doubtful that the Defendant would

understand the complexities of all the references to the Civil Procedure Rules, the requirements

in the Protection and Freedoms Act (POFA) and in established case law, which is often the case

when a Defendant is questioned about such references at Court. Therefore, everything that the

Defendant has outlined is not accepted and denied by my Company.'
My question...will this not go against me?

2. ' "Where a parking charge becomes overdue a reasonable sum may be added. This sum

must not exceed £60 (inclusive of VAT where applicable) unless Court Proceedings have

been initiated." In view of the Defendant not paying the charge within the initial 28 days allowed or the further

28 days allowed after the Notice to Keeper has been sent, the parking charge has become

overdue and a reasonable sum of £60 has been added.'
My question....does this still count as AoP even with what they have stated?

Thanks again for all the help!

nosferatu1001

1) Why would it? Its a clearly RUBBISH statement by them, hoping to dissuade YOU.  Its just an assertion - they have no proof, it isnt a fact, and they re making more argumetns. 

2) Yes of course it bloody does. It deos not alter, in any way shape or form , the abuse of proces. NOTHING about what theyve put chanegs this in anyway .