CEL _ Court Witness Statement Help

bargepole

Update: I have been assisting the OP off-forum.

Her hearing was at Dartford County Court today (Claim no. E2GM662E), where a Miss Hodnett, a CEL employee, turned up.

She has just reported that she WON, only about 20 minutes after being called into court. She will post a full report later.

There was also another CEL case at that court this morning, and apparently they lost that one as well.

nosferatu1001

Fantastic!
Rare to see CEL get through to court. SUggests discontinuing is the best option for them...

sally6588

So here is the update after my court appearance today .

Firstly I would like to say I would not have been able to do this without the wonderful Bargepole, he was fantastic and even put up with my panic emails right up until I entered the court room this morning, so a huge thank you!

I entered the court actually quaking in my boots, CEL had 2 cases at Dartford County Court this morning and two different representatives, mine was an employee of CEL a Miss Hodnett (MH). The first case they lost and I listened to the gentleman representing CEL telling MH that he had not expected to win, and thats how it goes !! This made me think oh great they will be gunning for me then...

The Judge Alison Russell (JR) confirmed the case and asked MH who she was and then spoke to me and said, so you have taken the time to appear yourself today and smiled. MH got the chance to speak first and stated that my WS was 1 day late, to which JR said that it was a small claims court and 1 day was irrelevant. MH carried on and said that they had a contract with the George Hotel in Chatham to which all visitors to the hotel require a permit to park at all times and they had checked that day and I had not had a permit on the time in question and therefore was issued a penalty, MH also commented that I had ignored all correspondence up until the time I was issued a summons, MH seemed quite nervous although glared at me which I thought unnecessary.
JR then stated that she had not seen my WS to which I replied it had been delivered to the court on the 30th July and I had confirmation, AR said it was ok and did I have a copy for her, which of course I did. JR then asked me to speak, I read my statement and stated that I was reliant on "Promissary Estoppel" as I had no contract with CEL and neither had the gym I attended, therefore I requested the case be dismissed. JR then looked at my evidence, proof of my gym membership and a statement from the gym manager stating that members could park at in the George Carpark during their sessions at the gym, she also said ahh.. you were doing a HIIT session too and smiled!
JR then turned to MH and asked if she had the contract with the hotel with her, to which MH said she did not, JR also asked had they checked with the hotel if they had this arrangement with the Gym, to which MH said no, JR then said, so MH you have no contract, you have not checked with the hotel or the gym, to which MH said they had not and reiterated that I was not on the list and should have obtained a permit as they had a contract with the hotel. JR then stated that MH had only confirmed my defence as their contract was with the hotel and CEL they had no contract with me or the gym and therefore they had no claim and the case was dismissed.

I was then awarded £123 costs and JR asked MH if she had any comment regarding my costs, to which MH responded that she had costs too, JR laughed and said but you lost MH you cannot claim costs.

This was all over and done with, in less than 15minutes!! I left in total shock, I did thank JR and she said I was welcome and have a good morning .

So another win for MSE and the wonderful Bargepole xx

bargepole

It's always nice to help someone win their case by remote control. I could have made the trek to Dartford today, but it would have been a waste of time and money for a case that was always likely to be dismissed in short order, despite Sally's panicking messages.

The Judge who heard this was actually an Employment Tribunal Judge, which the County Courts sometimes draft in when they are short of resources. So it's likely that she wouldn't have come across many parking cases before, but could still see that CEL's case had more holes in it than an emmental cheese wrapped in a string vest.

It remains a mystery why CEL decided to vary their usual policy of skulking in the shadows and avoiding court hearings like the plague, and turn up for two cases at Dartford.

Umkomaas

It remains a mystery why CEL decided to vary their usual policy of skulking in the shadows and avoiding court hearings like the plague, and turn up for two cases at Dartford.

Especially given the distance between their (purported) HQ at Exchange Flags, Liverpool and Dartford! :cool: Long journey home, eh, Miss Hodnett?

Liverpool my Jim Royle!

Well done sally6588, well done bargepole. Nice result and report.

System

Well done Mr B. You're on top form this week

It remains a mystery why CEL decided to vary their usual policy of skulking in the shadows and avoiding court hearings like the plague, and turn up for two cases at Dartford.

Perhaps it is because it is not their usual policy.

nosferatu1001

Well done on getting costs as well

beamerguy

Another great result

I had to smile ...

"JR asked MH if she had any comment regarding my costs, to which MH responded that she had costs too, JR laughed and said but you lost MH you cannot claim costs."

WAKEY WAKEY Miss Hodnett:rotfl::rotfl:

It must be assumed that the courts know all about
the CEL rubbish

Coupon-mad

Just read this, bargepole pointed it out to me - well done to Sally and bargepole!

Have to add 'another one bites the dust' (makes these court wins easy to search for & count).

I suspect that CEL attended due to a non-forum defence 'from the heart' about the story of what happened, and the fact you tried Mediation, which marked you out as a victim even though you filed evidence to support what you said.

With parking cases, trying Mediation = signals a PPC 'victim', IMHO so this is a great example of two things:

- not to try Mediation, at all, and

- how a decent WS and evidence and remote coaching can win a case in minutes!

:T

YDARB

IN THE COUNTY COURT

CLAIM No: XXX

BETWEEN:

VEHICLE CONTROL SERVICES (Claimant)

-and-

XXX (Defendant)

________________________________________
WITNESS STATEMENT
________________________________________

1. I am XXX , of XXX, the Defendant in this matter.

2. The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. Where they are not within my own knowledge there are true to the best of my information and belief

3. I deny every allegation set out in the Particulars of Claim.

4. Whilst I am the Registered Keeper of the vehicle concerned, there is no evidence of the driver.

5. The Defendant denies being the driver at the time of the supposed event, and therefore puts VCS to strict proof that any contract can exist between the Claimant and themselves.

6. More than one family member, who I have no obligation to name to a private parking firm, have access to this vehical. It remains the burden of the Claimant to prove their case.

7. I have visited the site of the alleged breach and have read the signage. The signage does not state parking on the road is prohibited, the sign on the gate reads 'By entering this private land you are entering into a contract with Vehicle Control Services'. From the claimants evidence the vehicle has not entered past the gates.

8. Each time I have visited the site I have seen a different card parked on this land, leading me to believe other motorist do not believe they are in breach by parking there. I have picture evidence of this.

9. Point 5.3 of my deface refers to ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67 stating that A parking charge cannot be dressed up by a non-landowner parking firm. I have a copy of this as evidence.

10. Points 6.1, 6.2 and 7 of my defence refer to POFA. I also have a copy of this for evidence.
I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.

Signature
Date