Norwich Traffic Control make claim via Northampton County Court against me... HELP!

Coupon-mad

 

PLEASE CHANNEL YOUR ANGER ABOUT THIS PATHETIC CHARGE TO CHANGE THE WAY THE PARKING INDUSTRY WORK:

CALLING ALL NEWBIES! 

 

An urgent task – deadline approaching in a week or so:

Please now make a real difference because not enough people have yet, and time is running out. 

The Government is consulting for just a few more days, about a new statutory code of practice (CoP) and framework intended to rein in the rogue parking firms. 

Does it go far enough?  Read and comment on the draft CoP proposal and the enforcement framework consultation (two separate consultation documents).

HOW TO DO THE SUBMISSIONS:

BSI PAS 232 – COMMENTING ON THE CODE OF PRACTICE AS DRAFTED:

1.    You will need to register then log in, to comment on the CoP and enter an occupation even if you are retired or a homemaker.  

 

2.    Register, log into the BSI page, and download & read the cover letter here:

https://standardsdevelopment.bsigroup.com/projects/2020-00193#/section

 

3.    Read the cover letter again and note the suggested extra questions... if you agree that, say, the 'loading/unloading and dropping off, asking for directions, and disabled people parking on double yellows as they can on street' activities listed should be exempt (not parking events, what do you think?) then please go to the Annexes at the end of the PAS Code and find the one about Exempt Vehicles and state what other activity you think should be added to the exempt list. 

 

4.    Download the PAS itself and start commenting on what you wish to say something about.  Quick links to each section appear on the left of your page. 

 

You don’t have to comment on everything, e.g. you might want to skip the definitions and focus on later sections, and certainly look at the Annex tables at the end that show things like consideration & grace periods and exemptions.

 

5.    Submit comments when you are happy with them. Don’t just ‘SAVE’ and forget!

 

THAT IS HALF THE JOB DONE!

THE MHCLG CONSULTATION IS EASIER AS IT IS JUST A LIST OF QUESTIONS. 

 

6.    You can do it first if preferred or pushed for time:

https://forms.office.com/Pages/ResponsePage.aspx?id=EGg0v32c3kOociSi7zmVqAVPfAOtwRxLhHRwQ610oElUMzhQSVo0WUQ4SERVSEZaUU9DTUhFQ1VMUy4u

If your answers exceed 4000 characters (approx. 500 words to a single question or 16000 words (approx. 2500 words) for all the questions below, you can email your answers to parking@communities.gov.uk as long as you state who you are.

THESE ARE THE QUESTIONS YOU WILL SEE, FOR RESPONSES TO THE FRAMEWORK:

Q1 Do you agree or disagree that members of APAs should be required to use a single appeals service appointed by the Secretary of State?

Strongly agree/Somewhat agree/Neither agree nor disagree/Somewhat disagree/Strongly disagree

 

Q1.1 Please explain your answer

(free text)

 

 

Q2 Please provide any other feedback on the determination of appeals, including the funding model and features that an appeal service should offer e.g. telephone or in-person hearings, the ability to submit evidence online

(free text)

 

Q3 Please provide any comments you have on the proposal to enforce the Code by combining the ATA’s existing audit procedures with additional safeguards.

(free text)

 

Q4 Please outline any alternative means by which the Code could be monitored and enforced. You may wish to cite evidence from other regulatory frameworks which are relevant.

(free text)

 

Q5 Please provide any feedback you have on the proposed governance arrangements for monitoring the new Code of Practice

(free text)

 

Q6 Which parking charge system is most appropriate for private parking?

 a) the Three-tiered system

 b) Mirroring the Local Authority system

(free text)

 

 Q6.1 Please explain your answer. You may, for example, wish to make reference to other deterrent frameworks (for example, for railway tickets or traffic violations)

(free text)

 

 

Q7 What level of discount is appropriate:

40% as is currently offered in private parking and suggested in the three-tiered system, or

50% as is offered in Local Authority parking?

a) 40%

b) 50%

 

Q7.1 Please explain your answer, including whether the discount should be set at a different level

(free text)

 

 

 Q8 How should the level of parking charges be set and how should the levels be revised in future?

(free text)

 

 

Q9 Do you agree or disagree in principle with the idea of the Appeals Charter?

Agree/Disagree

 

Q9.1 Please explain your answer

(free text)

 

 

Q10 Do you agree or not that the examples given in the Appeals Charter are fair and appropriate? Agree/Disagree

 

Q10.1 Please explain your answer.

You may wish, for example, to suggest additional cases to be covered in an Appeals Charter or query existing examples.

(free text)

 

Q11 Do you agree or disagree that the parking industry should contribute towards the cost of the regulation?

Agree/Disagree

 

Q11.1 Please explain your answer.

(free text)

 

YOU CAN INSTEAD GIVE MORE CONCISE ANSWERS ONLINE, USING THE MHCLG PAGE LINK.

Don’t forget that answering these questions is the easier bit…

Looking at the BSI PAS (the draft code of practice itself) involves logging in and submitting comments again, and again and again and takes more time!

There is a discussion about PAS submissions and what the pages look like, here:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6195417/am-i-doing-something-wrong/p1

 

elgordo9

Le_Kirk said:

Have look at this  thread and send a complaint to CCBC: -
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/77588069#Comment_77588069  (where you will find the advice recommended by @Coupon-mad) and go here for the beginning of the thread: -
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6190061/notice-of-proposed-allocation-to-the-small-claims-track/p1

Hi, 
I made a complaint to the CCBC and this was the response I received:

"Thank you for your recent complaint received on 15 October 2020.  I am the Team Leader and I am writing in response to your complaint.

Your complaint about the stay being lifted after 2 years  

I have looked into your complaint to find out what happened and have detailed my findings below.

Looking into your case

I can see on the 8 September 2020 the claimant paid for an application to lift the stay on the case and for the case to proceed, this was referred to the District Judge who allowed the application to proceed.  An order detailing the Judges directions was sent by post on the 8th September.

The Directions Questionnaires were sent out on 8 September 2020 along with the above order. We have received Direction Questionnaires from both parties and the case has now been transferred to Norwich County Court.

Staff at the County Court Business Centre are not legally trained, we cannot offer any advice to the legality of cases. The County Court Business Centre is a processing centre for specified money claims, all information on cases are provided by the claimant, we are not able to amend, change or cancel any cases of our own accord."

Needless to say, the complaint appears to have fallen upon deaf ears and I've just received a standardised response.

I'm really beginning to lose faith here and it appears to me as though the court system is absolutely willing to entertain these scam artists as they appear to generate a large amount of money from it too. 

elgordo9

Hi All, 

Following a SAR to BW Legal I have noticed that not one of the photos provided has an unobstructed view of the whole dashboard. Thus, how can we verify that there was or was not a pay and display ticket on display? The glare on the window screen makes it impossible to tell. Given the length of time that has passed since the event in question, arguably I would not have kept that ticket nor remember if I had or hadn't paid for one for however much it may have been. 

Is this a viable defence to include within my witness statement or are we past that point now?

Redx

It is for the claimant to prove their claim , so you introduce doubt by stating the above

It is not for you to prove the ticket was present , you can say it was , if it was , it is for them to disprove it

I believe you are looking at the burden of proof from the wrong angle

Le_Kirk

elgordo9 said:

Le_Kirk said:

Have look at this  thread and send a complaint to CCBC: -
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/77588069#Comment_77588069  (where you will find the advice recommended by @Coupon-mad) and go here for the beginning of the thread: -
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6190061/notice-of-proposed-allocation-to-the-small-claims-track/p1

I made a complaint to the CCBC and this was the response I received:

<SNIP>Needless to say, the complaint appears to have fallen upon deaf ears and I've just received a standardised response.

At least you know they sent out the judgment to you along with DQ, unlike some other posters who suddenly received an allocation to hearing.  Also it states that the claimant made a payment to have the stay lifted

Le_Kirk

elgordo9 said:

Following a SAR to BW Legal I have noticed that not one of the photos provided has an unobstructed view of the whole dashboard. Thus, how can we verify that there was or was not a pay and display ticket on display? The glare on the window screen makes it impossible to tell. Given the length of time that has passed since the event in question, arguably I would not have kept that ticket nor remember if I had or hadn't paid for one for however much it may have been. 
Is this a viable defence to include within my witness statement or are we past that point now?

Redx said:

It is for the claimant to prove their claim , so you introduce doubt by stating the above
It is not for you to prove the ticket was present , you can say it was , if it was , it is for them to disprove it
I believe you are looking at the burden of proof from the wrong angle

Exactly the same as the angle from which the photos were taken!  This (seems to be) is a common ploy by the PPCs to try to prove there was no ticket.  It is not a defence to include in your witness statement, that would have been in the defence.  However, you are able to put it in your WS to support and back up your defence as already filed.

elgordo9

Le_Kirk said:

Exactly the same as the angle from which the photos were taken!  This (seems to be) is a common ploy by the PPCs to try to prove there was no ticket.  It is not a defence to include in your witness statement, that would have been in the defence.  However, you are able to put it in your WS to support and back up your defence as already filed.

Unfortunately I had to submit my defence (back in 2018) without access to any of the photographs. It was only following a recent SAR that I obtain copies of any evidence. 

Coupon-mad

Which is great because these observations go into your WS and you also raise this during the hearing.

I suggest you send the information about what BW Legal have been doing to Sir Greg Knight and the MHCLG.  Ask if they are aware that this robo-claim solicitor is leaving cases for two years then paying £100 to resurrect them (dozens, maybe hundreds, as shown on forums), and shown no evidence to anyone who this has happened to, that they made any checks to be sure that the person has not moved away. 

 This is a disaster waiting to happen if this is not dealt with and prevented in the PAS232 and wider framework.  It should ideally include a new pre-action protocol and rules about parking firms and court claims and at the very least, the Government could prevent parking firms and their robo-claim legal firms from issuing claims then leaving them dormant, only to lift the stay many months/years later.  This horrendous, anti-consumer tactic, if adopted as the norm even by a few parking firms, will ruin people's credit by stealth and was not addressed by CCJ reform because no-one had seen parking firms/BW Legal do this before.

It stinks.

nosferatu1001

Yep, as twice told, you state in your WS that.... as shown by....