Received over 10 tickets, need help!

KeithP

missyjingles wrote: »

Is it ok to post my WS here so far (with details omitted) and some queries I have?

Yes .

missyjingles

ignore this, after reading more examples last night, I am revising the WS and will repost shortly.

missyjingles

[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]I have reviewed my WS, I was clearly using the wrong example as a template to base my own WS on, could you please run your eyes over this 1st attempt.[/FONT]
[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]On point 4.1 - is this the correct case to refer to?[/FONT]
[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]In the County Court at XXXXXXXXX
Claim No. XXXXXX
Between
XXXXXX
and
XXXXXX

---

Witness Statement

---

1. Preliminary [/FONT]


[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]1.1 I am XXXX XXXXXX, of XXXXXX, the Defendant in this matter.

1.2 Attached to this statement is a paginated bundle of documents marked XXX etc., to which I will refer. [/FONT]


[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]1.3 The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. Where they are not within my own knowledge, they are true to the best of my information and belief.

1.4 The claim refers to 3 PCN's involving vehicle XXXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, [/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif][FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]XX/XX/XXXX, [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif][FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif][FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]XX/XX/XXXX [/FONT][/FONT]at the location of XXXXX.

1.5 This is my Witness Statement in support of my Defence already submitted.
[/FONT]

[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]2. Sequence of Events
[/FONT]

[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]2.1 On 17/10/2017, I moved out of the family home due to marital problems. I found a room in a house share with off street parking and rented it in good faith at XX XXXXX XXXXXXX. See exhibit xxx (Hand written note from “landlord”)[/FONT]


[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]2.2 I started to receive parking charge tickets (10 in total) and the landlord advised me not to worry. He said as the development was still under construction, the tickets would not count, they were only given out as a deterrent, but he would get me a permit anyway. The landlord failed to supply me with a parking permit and I requested one repeatedly. See exhibit xxx (print out of text thread between the “landlord” and 1).[/FONT]


[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]2.3 After 10 weeks an eviction notice was served at the address as the landlord was not the landlord at all. He was illegally sub-letting the rooms and pocketing all the money. All the tenants were evicted and all deposits were lost. See exhibit xxx (copy of email from XXXXXX Property Management which states we were not tenants on the agreement and to vacate the property).[/FONT]


[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]2.4 Two of the ten PCNs have already been the subject of a claim. I was unable to respond in time due to being out of the country. Payment was made in time and under protest, in order to avoid a CCJ. [/FONT]


[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]2.5 I have requested for the remaining 8 tickets which relate to 2 vehicles XXXXXX and XXXXXX, to be amalgamated and to be served one claim, as this is wasting the court's time and escalating costs for me. However, this hearing only refers to 3 of the PCN's.
[/FONT]

[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]3 The Parking Bay

3.1 There were no clear road markings showing parking bays during my stay at the property. You can see that some of the tarmac from the recent photographic evidence, has only very recently been laid and is still not complete. See Exhibit xxx

3.2 When staying at this property, all the residents from the adjoining properties would park differently, Some would parallel to street, whilst others would park backing on into the slight recess, so there was much confusion to the correct parking requirements. [/FONT]
[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]
4 Inadequate Signage

4.1 On entering XXXXXXXX, I did not see any signage from my vehicle clearly indicating the parking restrictions. I believe that in the case of “Vine vs London Borough of Waltham Forest” the Court of Appeal ruled that a person cannot be presumed bound by terms and conditions on signage that they have not seen. In this case, which was found in favour of the motorist, the signage was deemed insufficient because there was no signage directly adjacent to the Appellant’s parking bay and the only signage that was displayed could not have been seen from within the vehicle when parking, as in the case here. See Exhibit xxx

4.2 The signage in place at XXXXXXX is difficult to read. A key factor in the case of “ParkingEye vs Beavis” was that the relevant signs were “large, prominent and legible so that any reasonable user of the car park would be aware of their existence and nature” and that “the charge is prominently displayed in large letters and at frequent intervals within it”. That is not the case here. See Exhibit XXX

4.3 The signage does state that “Vehicles must park fully within the confines of a marked bay”. However, as the development was (and still is under construction), there were no road markings whatsoever showing where the parking bays actually were. See Exhibit XXX

4.4 The IPC guidelines state that text 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.’ The text on the signage, particularly that which refers to ‘contractual terms’ and a ‘parking charge’ is very small. This, coupled with the fact that the sign is mounted at least ?ft (I need to check actual height and will go today) off the ground or placed very low and so is obscured by bushes or parked cars, makes it very hard to read and impossible to read from a vehicle. See Exhibit XXX[/FONT]


[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]5 Declaration

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.

Statement of Truth

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


Signature

Date [/FONT]








[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]02/06/2019[/FONT]

missyjingles

Just read that I need to reference the PACE v Lengyel transcript, so I shall edit and include as soon as I’m home from work this evening.

How does the rest look?

Coupon-mad

If you have other 'live' claims (not just pre-court) add:

2.6. I ask that the Judge consolidates this claim with the other claim xxxxxxxx and that the upcoming hearing will cover all the parking charges which turn on the same facts, same defendant/car park and alleged contravention.

Also put a covering letter attached to your WS and evidence file (in a ring binder for the court). The covering letter needs to be headed:

URGENT - FOR THE ATTENTION OF THE PRESIDING JUDGE IN ADVANCE OF THE HEARING IN CLAIM NUMBER XXXXXXXXX

REQUEST FOR CONSOLIDATION OF CLAIMS INTO THE SINGLE HEARING ON XX/XX/19.

You do need Pace v Lengyel, as your husband's main defence is surely that this can only be a matter of inadvertent trespass, not any contractual terms he can have 'accepted' to be allowed to trespass for £100 per day price (which is impossible, and the Beavis case confirmed that ParkingEye could not have recovered any sum in trespass).

missyjingles

Shall I include copies of the original PCN's against paragraph 2.6 regarding consolidating all claims?


I also just spoke to the Court who confirmed that I can hand deliver the WS, so planning to do this tomorrow if I get this all finalised this evening.

missyjingles

Below is my latest draft, I have added a para under section 5 for no contract, is this correct?


and para 2.6 as instructed by coupon-mad


On the evidence regarding a text thread between my husband and the "landlord", should I hi-light the relevant comments regarding requests for parking permits, or just leave it in its entirety as there are texts referring to the eviction too?


We have shot a video driving into the street in question, showing the position of the signs. Does my husband supply this evidence by handing his phone to the judge to view?


I found 5 different transcripts on the Parking Prankster website for PE v Beavis, which one shoud I use?


4.1 - I could not locate the transcript for [FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]Vine vs London Borough of Waltham Forest.[/FONT]
[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]
[/FONT]










[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]In the County Court at XXX
Claim No. XXX
Between
XXX
and
XXX

---

Witness Statement

---

1. Preliminary[/FONT]


[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]1.1 I am XXX, of XXX, the Defendant in this matter.

1.2 Attached to this statement is a paginated bundle of documents marked EV1, EV2 etc., to which I will refer. [/FONT]


[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]1.3 The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. Where they are not within my own knowledge, they are true to the best of my information and belief.

1.4 The claim refers to 3 PCN's involving vehicle XXX on XX/XX/XXXX, [/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif][FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]XX/XX/XXXX[/FONT], [/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif][FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]XX/XX/XXXX[/FONT] at the location of XXX.

1.5 This is my Witness Statement in support of my Defence already submitted.
[/FONT]



[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]2. Sequence of Events
[/FONT]

[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]2.1 On 17/10/2017, I moved out of the family home due to marital problems. I found a room in a house share with off street parking and rented it in good faith at XXX. See exhibit EV1.[/FONT]


[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]2.2 I started to receive parking charge tickets (10 in total) and the landlord advised me not to worry. He said as the development was still under construction, the tickets would not count, they were only given out as a deterrent, but he would get me a permit anyway. The landlord failed to supply me with a parking permit and I requested one repeatedly. See exhibit EV2.[/FONT]


[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]2.3 After 10 weeks an eviction notice was served at the address as the landlord was not the landlord at all. He was illegally sub-letting the rooms and pocketing all the money. All the tenants were evicted and all deposits were lost. See exhibit EV3. [/FONT]


[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]2.4 Two of the ten PCNs have already been the subject of a claim. I was unable to respond in time due to being out of the country. Payment was made in time and under protest, in order to avoid a CCJ. See exhibit EV4.[/FONT]


[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]2.5 I have requested for the remaining 8 tickets which relate to 2 vehicles XXX and XXX, to be amalgamated and to be served one claim, as this is wasting the court's time and escalating costs for me. However, this hearing only refers to 3 of the PCN's.[/FONT]


[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]2.6. I ask that the Judge consolidates this claim with the other claims XXX, XXX, XXX, XXX, XXX and that the upcoming hearing will cover all the parking charges which turn on the same facts, same defendant, same location and alleged contravention. See exhibit EV5.[/FONT]
[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]
[/FONT]

[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]3 The Parking Bay

3.1 There were no clear road markings showing parking bays during my stay at the property, and you can see that some of the tarmac from the recent photographic evidence, has only been laid very recently. See Exhibit xxx

3.2 When staying at this property, all the residents from the adjoining properties would park differently. Some would park parallel to street, whilst others would park backing on into the slight recess. There was much confusion to the correct parking requirements. [/FONT]
[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]

4 Inadequate Signage

4.1 On entering XXX, I did not see any signage from my vehicle clearly indicating the parking restrictions. I believe that in the case of “Vine vs London Borough of Waltham Forest” the Court of Appeal ruled that a person cannot be presumed bound by terms and conditions on signage that they have not seen. In this case, which was found in favour of the motorist, the signage was deemed insufficient because there was no signage directly adjacent to the Appellant’s parking bay and the only signage that was displayed could not have been seen from within the vehicle when parking, as in the case here. See Exhibit xxx

4.2 The signage in place at XXX is difficult to read. A key factor in the case of “ParkingEye vs Beavis” was that the relevant signs were “large, prominent and legible so that any reasonable user of the car park would be aware of their existence and nature” and that “the charge is prominently displayed in large letters and at frequent intervals within it”. That is not the case here. See Exhibit XXX

4.3 The signage does state that “Vehicles must park fully within the confines of a marked bay”. However, as the development was (and still is under construction), there were no road markings whatsoever showing where the parking bays actually were. See Exhibit XXX

4.4 The IPC guidelines state that text 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.’ The text on the signage, particularly that which refers to ‘contractual terms’ and a ‘parking charge’ is very small. This, coupled with the fact that the sign is either mounted at least 9ft off the ground or placed very low at 3ft off the ground, it is obscured by bushes or parked cars and makes it very hard to read and impossible to read from a vehicle. See Exhibit XXX[/FONT]




[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]5 No contract[/FONT]


[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]5.1 The defendant refers the Court to the persuasive case of PACE Recovery and Storage v Lengyel. C7GF6E3R in which District Judge Iyer concluded as parking required a permit, and as the driver did not and could not have a permit, the contract in any case failed by the doctrine of impossibility. As many other judges have found with this type of signage, this would mean no contract could be in place and the driver would be a trespasser. As the claim did not argue trespass, it was therefore bound to fail. See exhibit XXX.[/FONT]




[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]6 Declaration

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.

Statement of Truth

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


Signature

Date [/FONT]








[FONT=Trebuchet MS, sans-serif]02/06/2019[/FONT]

Le_Kirk

I believe that handing a memory stick with the video on it at the time you hand over your bundle is the way to go but also can you take a laptop with you? Make sure it is charged fully and contains the video! Advise the usher on the way in and include it in your evidence.

Coupon-mad

I found 5 different transcripts on the Parking Prankster website for PE v Beavis, which one should I use?

None, and there cannot be 5 transcripts. There were only 3 stages. Anyway you do not need to put a Supreme Court binding case in as an exhibit.

4.1 - I could not locate the transcript for Vine vs London Borough of Waltham Forest.

Google it, easy to find.

Shall I include copies of the original PCN's against paragraph 2.6 regarding consolidating all claims?

No, only the Claim numbers, if they are all now at court stage.

And you need to reiterate your request for consolidation of the claims, in a covering letter on the front of your WS and evidence file.

missyjingles

thank you so much for your continued guidance with this.


ok, so the remaining 5 tickets have not gone to claim stage, I assume they should have as all these tickets were recieved within a space of 10 weeks. Do you think they have they been put on hold because of this claim going to court?



so I don't request consolidation?


In the plaintiffs WS there is a paragraph which says;


"the defendant makes reference to other charges that she (should be he) has incurred and requests for them all to be "amalgamated". The defendant is asked to note that this claim relates to the charges as detailed above and they are the subject of these proceedings. I submit that for all other matters upon which proceedings have been issued these can be consolidated if the court so see fit. However, it is noted that some charges are yet to be litigated upon and therefore should be dealt with seperately."


Also in the covering letter, GS state;


"The assumption is that our client is not attending the hearing and therefore we kindly request this notice be treated as a notice pursuant CPR 27.9. However on some occasions our client may wish to attend and will do so."