County Court Claim For for Parking ticket, advice

FlyGuyRM

I appreciate all comments on this WS and advice on best way to send to the court now that it is late.

Coupon-mad

OK, some quick comments:

Don't call the scammer a 'parking officer' (honestly they are NOT).

UKCPM are not in the BPA AOS, they are in the IPC AOS, so scrutinise the IPC CoP instead, on grace periods.

A copy of ParkingEye Limted vs Beavis [2015] has been attached

Nope, it is MASSIVE and not needed, as it is a Supreme Court decision.

You need to adduce your tenancy agreement or lease in evidence and say you have primacy of contract and can certainly unload at your home, for a few minutes. You have rights and easements, and an implied right to peaceful enjoyment of your property and access/rights of way.

Have you got photo proof that there are yellow lines NOW but it was unmarked before? Put pictures in as evidence.

You really need to put the APPEAL case of Jopson v Homeguard into evidence!

See the Parking Prankster's case law and 'more case law' pages!

Take it all with you on the day.

Email the WS and evidence to the Claimant TONIGHT an take a printed copy to the court in the morning (or get a relative to do this without fail).

Mark on the front on the contents page, or the front of a ring binder file, the claim number, your name and the hearing date and time and make sure the Usher takes it, or points out the post box to put it in!

Oh, of you get time draw up a costs schedule as well (example in the NEWBIES thread). You want to claim your wasted costs for attending, if you win. That ALSO needs filing & serving to court & the Claimant's solicitors.



P.S. (This case doesn't count as a forum assisted one either way as you didn't follow the forum advice and didn't come back for regular help). Hope you win though!

FlyGuyRM

1. Ok I will remove the term enforcment officer and replace with??


2. I will amend from BPA to IPC


3. I am not the tenant, the tenant is a friend of mine who are was helping unload shopping and their child from my vehicle to their property.


4. I previously stated in my defence that they had given me permission to park.


5. I have pictures sent to me by UKCPM showing no markings, as well as google images. I have also taken pictures of the new markings.


6. I stated the Jopson case in my defence statement. Should I just transpose it over?


7. I will email the WS once staisfactory. Take a copy of the WS and evidence to the relevant Court tomorrow?


8. Do I need to provide a copy of S4 POFA, BEAVIS, POPLA Annual Report 2015 and Jopson v Home Guard in that bundle to the court?


Thanks for the help

KeithP

FlyGuyRM wrote: »

1. Ok I will remove the term enforcment officer and replace with??

"I believe that whoever issued the PCN..."

FlyGuyRM

Updated WS. Comments please
Thanks
FlyGuy

In the County Court at XXXXXXXXXXX

Claim Number:

Between

UK CAR PARK MANAGEMENT (Claimant)

and

MR XXXXXX (Defendant)


WITNESS STATEMENT

I, XXXXX, of XXXXXXXX, will say as follows:

I am the Defendant in this matter. Attached to this statement is a paginated bundle of documents marked RW01 to which I will refer.

Before I describe what happened on the day I stopped in an unmarked are of XXX Residential Estate, I confirm that the essence of my defence to this claim is that:

a. I did not breach the terms and conditions of parking

b. The Claimant's signage did not make it clear whether there was an area if any liable to the alleged contractual agreement.

• On XXX I was in XXX to drop off and help to unload belongings and young child of the tenant of XXX to their third floor property. There were no readable signS from where I had stopped the vehicle (unmarked curb, with other vehicles parked alongside) at which time it was also dark. I wasn’t familiar with the estate as the tenant had recently moved to the property, nonetheless I made reasonable effort to leave as quickly as it was late in the evening.
  
  
• Since the date of the incident I have revisited the location in question and images from RW01 date XXX show (a) how the signage is ineligible from where my vehicle was stopped and (b) new double yellow line markings have been placed, signifying the clear confusion being caused previously and in my case. Please see exhibit RW02 and RW03.
  
• A copy of ParkingEye Limted vs Beavis [2015] has been attached to this statement as part of RW01. This Judgment in agreed that the signage although plentiful in the area, it was not clear. From the photo’s produced as evidence it can be seen that the signage in my case is high up, unable to be read from the view point of driver or unless, walking up directly in front of the signage.
  
  
• I believe that whoever issued the PCN, would have witnessed me coming back and forth from my vehicle and would have had an opportunity to clarify any parking terms prior to issuing the PCN, as when I returned from my vehicle I could see him walking away from it.
  
• I have also considered the Code of Practice ("CoP") of the Independent Parking Committee ("IPC"), of which the Claimant is an accredited member. A copy of paragraph 15.1 of the Part B CoP, which relates to grace periods, is at page XXX of RW01. This COP clearly states that drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to park and read any signs so to make an informed decision as to whether to or not remain on the site. I believe that due to the ambiguity and lack of clear readable signage that this code was not adhered to by the Claimant.
  
• Paragraph 14.1 of the CoP clearly states that predatory or misleading tactics must not be used into luring drivers into incurring parking charges. I believe the signage at the location is/was in contravention of this code. In the case of Moncrieff, Lord Neuberger defined parking as longer term/leaving of a vehicle for a period of time, and this definition was echoed more recently at a County Court Appeal case, regarding a very similar unfair/predatory parking charge, where HHJ Harris QC in Jopson v Homeguard Services Ltd (2016) held that life at a block of flats would be 'unworkable' if people were penalised for brief stopping to unload close to a block of flats. This case supports my position that I did not breach any terms of parking with the Claimant.
  
  
• It is my position that, under the doctrine of promissory estoppel, the Claimant has no standing, or cause of action, to litigate in this matter.
  
  
• I invite the Court to dismiss this claim in its entirety, and to award my costs of attendance at the hearing, such as are allowable pursuant to CPR 27.14.
  
  I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.
  
  
  Signature of Defendant:
  
  
  Name:
  
  
  Date:

FlyGuyRM

My Final draft. About to send off to the claimant via email.


Excuse the formatting its messed up when I pasted the WS in

In the County Court at

Claim Number:

[IMG]file:///C:/Users/7229644/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image001.gif[/IMG]

Between

UK CAR PARK MANAGEMENT (Claimant)

and

MR XXXXX (Defendant)


WITNESS STATEMENT

I, XXXXX, of XXXXXX will say as follows:

I am the Defendant in this matter. Attached to this statement is a paginated bundle of documents marked RW01 to which I will refer.

Before I describe what happened on the day I stopped in an unmarked are of XXXXXXX I confirm that the essence of my defence to this claim is that:



a. I did not breach the terms and conditions of parking



b. The Claimant's signage did not make it clear whether there was an area if any liable to the alleged contractual agreement.

• On 4th March 2017 I was in XXXXXX to drop off and help to unload belongings and young child of the tenant of XXXXX to their third floor property. There were no readable signs from where I had stopped the vehicle (unmarked curb, with other vehicles parked in front) at which time it was also dark. I wasn’t familiar with the estate as the tenant had recently moved to the property, nonetheless I made reasonable effort to leave as quickly as possible as it was late in the evening.
  
  
• Since the date of the incident I have revisited the location in question and images from RW01 show (a) how the signage is ineligible from where my vehicle was stopped and (b) new double yellow line markings have been placed down, signifying the clear confusion being caused previously and in my case. Exhibited to this Witness Statement as RW01 are the following documents that I (Defendant) wishes to rely upon;
  

• Two photos dated XXXXXX and XXXX provided by Gladstone Solicitors on 14th February 2019.
• Two photos taken by me (Defendant) on XXXXX at the exact location of this case at approximately the same time of when the PCN was issued.
• A photo from google earth of XXXXX (April 2018).
• Image of signage in XXXXX taken on XXXXX
• 
  
• As from the Supreme Court ruling from ParkingEye Limted vs Beavis [2015], this Judgment agreed that the signage although plentiful in the area, was not clear. From the photo’s produced as evidence it can be seen that the signage in my case is high up, poorly lit, unable to be read from the view point of driver unless walking up directly in front of the signage.

• I believe that whoever issued the PCN, would have witnessed me coming back and forth from my vehicle and would have had an opportunity to clarify any alleged parking terms prior to issuing the PCN, as when I returned from my vehicle I could see him walking away from it.
• I have also considered the Code of Practice ("CoP") of the Independent Parking Committee ("IPC"), of which the Claimant is an accredited member. A copy of paragraph 15.1 of the Part B CoP, which relates to grace periods, is at page 5 of RW01. This COP clearly states that drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to park and read any signs so to make an informed decision as to whether to or not remain on the site. I believe that due to the ambiguity and lack of clear readable signage that this code was not adhered to by the Claimant.
• Paragraph 14.1 of the CoP clearly states that predatory or misleading tactics must not be used into luring drivers into incurring parking charges. I believe the signage at the location is/was in contravention of this code. In the case of Moncrieff, Lord Neuberger defined parking as longer term/leaving of a vehicle for a period of time, and this definition was echoed more recently at a County Court Appeal case, regarding a very similar unfair/predatory parking charge, where HHJ Harris QC in Jopson v Homeguard Services Ltd (2016) held that life at a block of flats would be 'unworkable' if people were penalised for brief stopping to unload close to a block of flats. This case supports my position that I did not breach any terms of parking with the Claimant.
• It is my position that, under the doctrine of promissory estoppel, the Claimant has no standing, or cause of action, to litigate in this matter.
• I invite the Court to dismiss this claim in its entirety, and to award my costs of attendance at the hearing, such as are allowable pursuant to CPR 27.14.

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

Coupon-mad

I have no idea what you are saying here about the Beavis signs, but it is wrong:

As from the Supreme Court ruling from ParkingEye Limted vs Beavis [2015], this Judgment agreed that the signage although plentiful in the area, was not clear. From the photo’s produced as evidence it can be seen that the signage in my case is high up, poorly lit, unable to be read from the view point of driver unless walking up directly in front of the signage.

I am not the tenant, the tenant is a friend of mine who are was helping unload shopping and their child from my vehicle to their property.

Can you get a very quick signed & dated WS from that person, in the morning to pop in with your evidence, a statement that confirms the above and gives the right date and approx time of the PCN, to corroborate that you merely took a few minutes unloading, and that this is the norm at that site, and that UKCPM are harassing residents?

You could always email it separately to Gs, having emailed the rest tonight.

This is all VERY last minute but it is all about evidence and you nearly filed nothing!

Since the date of the incident I have revisited the location in question and images from RW01 show (a) how the signage is ineligible

Typo - should be illegible

Do I need to provide a copy of S4 POFA, BEAVIS, POPLA Annual Report 2015 and Jopson v Home Guard in that bundle to the court?

All except BEAVIS, as I said in post #43 already.

Yes the court and Claimant MUST have the same bundle. Gladstones can be by email.

FlyGuyRM

Schedule of costs drwan up and sent to UKCPM an Gladstone.


Good night. Appreciate the support

Coupon-mad

That's a start. No need to email UKCPM.

You do need to put right the Beavis case misstatement.

The Beavis signs were deemed clear and prominent and we use that case to compare bad signs to.

FlyGuyRM

Yes I have amended the Beavis para and typo. Just drove and got the WS from my friend. All sent over to UKCPM and G's along with the bundle docs.


Next stop the court in the morning.