Parking fines by UKPC

Money...MATTERS

Witness Statement

IN THE COUNTY COURT AT Claim No.:

Between

UK PARKING CONTROL LIMITED (Claimant)
&
(Defendant)


I, Name Address, am the defendant in this case.

1. 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.

2. I am not liable to the Claimant for the sum claimed, or any amount at all and this is my Witness Statement in support of my defence as already filed.

3. I accept that I am the registered keeper of the vehicle in question in this case.

4. This matter relates to a display car park and on the dates stated in the Claimants statement, I parked my car at the Car Park.

5. I have been a tenant of xxxx since date (Exhibit A) which is just over 20 years during which time I have been entitled to park free of charge and without the need to display a permit for the majority of this period. As part of the tenancy agreement I was issued with tenancy conditions which provides details about parking. There is no mention about any obligation to display a permit and likewise there is nothing about any agreement to pay a parking charge as a consequence. (Exhibit The landlord decided to issue parking permits to residents in June 2012, approximately 6 months from the start of my new tenancy agreement on 30/01/2012.

6. The parking scheme was introduced via xxxx to prevent non-residents parking at xxxx Street. Tenants were informed that if a permit is lost the permit would be cancelled and a new permit issued at a small cost to the tenant. There is no reference in these letters that any payment to a third party in this case UKPC limited is required if no permit is displayed.
The Housing Association advised tenants that “we hope this scheme will benefit all residents of your estate by way of preventing non-residents from parking in estate and limiting parking for tenants and visitors” ( Exhibit C). I therefore contest that charging a legitimate tenant in excess of £xx for x tickets is unjustified and senseless.

7. The permit had no mechanic to stick it anywhere, however, placed it on the dashboard on every occasion I park my car.

8. This worked until I was involved in a road traffic accident through no fault of mine. During this period also, I needed to drive in order to maintain a job and support my son’s education as a single parent.

9. I had a vehicle which was serving this purpose until I was involved in a Road traffic accident in June 2012 through no fault of mine. My care was written off but the compensation I received was not enough to purchase a replacement.

10. Life around this time was extremely stressful without a car, hence I struggled to meet work deadlines and my personal life was also a struggle. As a result, I appreciated it when I was gifted an old VW car around the period I was issued with all those parking tickets.

11. The parking tickets kept being issued as no matter how I place the permits; they kept falling down through the bonnet of this worn out car.

12. I was leaving notices on my windscreen each time I parked at the said parking space to explain my predicament and also for the parking attendants to just knock at my flat door for to verify that I am indeed a tenant. This attempt was ignored and the tickets kept being issued. This is evidence in the Claimants own pack (xx)

13. I also attempted to resolve this issue with the debt collector firm that UK PARKING CONTROL LIMITED contacted to pursue and harass me in collecting the unfair parking charges that I am a tenant at the Perry Street (Exhibit D) but to no avail.

14. I am contesting that the Claimant made no reasonable effects to resolve the matter. They could have supplied a self-adhesive sleeve to enable the permit to be displayed on the windscreen. The Claimant instead provided a permit that was not fit for purpose (Exhibit C).

15. I also contest that I have been a tenant of xx for the past xx years and I believe that I have been a good tenant over this period, paying my rent and council task even under difficult financial constraints.

16. In similar cases such as PACE v Noor, the judge ruled in favour of the defendant on the evidence that the defendant was a tenant and that a third party cannot unilaterally alter the terms of the tenancy agreement. (Exhibit E).

17. I therefore invite the judge to strike out this claim in its entirety.


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

NAME

Defendant.

Date:

Le_Kirk

In your point 7. you state you have no mechanic to stick it anywhere. Do you mean mechanism? In point 9. you say that your care was written off.

Money...MATTERS

Thanks to all those that provided helpful comments and suggestions. I have passed everything on to my colleague for submission. An update of her day in court will hopefully be provided shortly.

Coupon-mad

I hope she hasn't just emailed it to the local court?

Dangerous and NOT as we advise.

I don't see how she got this as a paper version on numbered pages in a ring binder and with a contents page and all the evidence printed out, physically handed in at her local court, when the last advice post you just got was after the court will have shut today.

Money...MATTERS

Okay so my colleague hasn't given me the full details yet but she said that she was losing her case.

The Judge apparently told her that the case law examples she submitted did not apply to her case because the defendants were leaseholders and she is a tenant (I'm not sure whether that was the case for all her exhibits) the Judge did however notice a discrepancy in the Claim - the amount they were claiming was more than was on the signs they submitted in their bundle so the Claimant's solicitor asked that the matter be adjourned so this can be discussed with the Claimant.

The Judge agreed but made it clear that no new evidence will be allowed. She also advised my colleague what she needs to do next (I have no idea what that advice is) the matter will be returned to court for a 2 - hour hearing.

Coupon-mad

Wow, quite rare, but surely the Defendant noticed that the amount they were claiming was more than was on the signs, if you mean they were pursuing a PCN of £100 but the signs only said £90, for example?

If the above is what it's about can you show us the sign?

Or was the Judge merely talking about the 'debt' being a fake £160 because the Claimants have slapped on pretend 'debt collection costs' which they never incurred? This is always the case and a well-prepped Defendant needs to be armed with the facts as to why they can't add sums to the parking charge (POFA, Beavis case, CPRs and the fact that debt letters cost the Claimant NOTHING).

Money...MATTERS

From my colleague

"Below is a host summary from the judge today:
Parking charges are not right. The court being concerned that each of the parking charge notices have been drawn up and served on the defendant for an incorrect sum as the signage clearly refers to a charge of £90 and not a £100 and whether each pcn is therefore invalidated by including incorrect information. The court considers that it is appropriate to adjourn today's hearing for the parties to consider the court's observations and prepare to argue the same at the adjourn hearing.

The judge indicated that I am in breach of the contract and referred to the information on my parking permit and also on the signage. She noted that the cases I presented are far removed from my own case. It was clearly going against me until she sported this technicality. She said she does not want any more statements and also informed the solicitor they could not change details of PCN which they have already issued and are available to the court. The solicitor argued that, regardless of this issue, it is a fact that I parked my car without a permit which the judge agreed but she also added that I may choose to sue the PPC for issuing incorrect PCNS. I therefore need to find out from the forum how I can argue this out in my favour at the next hearing. Also the solicitor hinted that perhaps the amount on the signage was different at the time the tickets were issue. I doubt this was the case but I am not sure how I can prove it as they took so long to take me to court on this and the pictures I took were from last month.

See you on Monday."

Coupon-mad

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=81150&st=80&p=916329&#entry916%20%20329

post #87 tells about the outcome of that case:

''So back in we go and the judge did quite a full and lengthy summing up of both sides and then stated that she had checked contract law and that as I didn't know which one I was being pursued for (£90 or £100) the claim must fail.''

This should be a straightforward contract law argument about the fact that you cannot be bound to pay a sum that quite simply, was not on the signs. Nor can you be bound to pay £90 because no PCN was issued for that sum.

Even in cases where the driver has been admitted, the benchmark for what a PCN must have on it, is set out in two places, one is statute law (the POFA Schedule 4) and one is the British Parking Association Code of Practice that the Supreme Court in ParkingEye v Beavis found was effectively 'regulatory'.

And the SUM OF THE PARKING CHARGE matching the SUM ON THE SIGNAGE is a pre-requisite of both the statute and the CoP.

She can look up the BPA CoP herself and find references to the MANDATORY requirements for signs - and it's not allowable to put a completely different sum in small writing then try to say the terms on that sign bound her to pay a completely different unknown sum that was never part of the alleged contract!

And the BPA CoP spells out a bit about what a PCN/NTK must have on it and the PARKING CHARGE is obviously mandatory or the entire case collapses.

A consumer cannot be bound by terms not on the signs nor by PCNs with the wrong sum on them.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted

2
(2) The reference in the definition of ''parking charge'' to a sum in the nature of damages is to a sum of which adequate notice was given to drivers of vehicles (when the vehicle was parked on the relevant land).

(3) For the purposes of sub-paragraph (2) “adequate notice” means notice given by—
(a) the display of one or more notices in accordance with any applicable requirements prescribed in regulations under paragraph 12 for, or for purposes including, the purposes of sub-paragraph (2); or
(b) where no such requirements apply, the display of one or more notices which—
(i) specify the sum as the charge for unauthorised parking; and

And re the Windscreen PCN:

7(1) A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to driver for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(a) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met.
(2) The notice must—
(a) specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;
(b) inform the driver of the requirement to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking and describe those charges, the circumstances in which the requirement arose (including the means by which it was brought to the attention of drivers) and the other facts that made those charges payable;
(c) inform the driver that the parking charges relating to the specified period of parking have not been paid in full and specify the total amount of the unpaid parking charges relating to that period, as at a time which is—
(i) specified in the notice; and
(ii) no later than the time specified under paragraph (f);


and re the postal Notice to Keeper that follows a windscreen PCN:

8(1) A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to keeper for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(a) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met.
(2) The notice must—
(a) specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;
(b) inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking and that the parking charges have not been paid in full;
(c) state that a notice to driver relating to the specified period of parking has been given and repeat the information in that notice as required by paragraph 7(2)(b), (c) and (f);
(d) if the unpaid parking charges specified in that notice to driver as required by paragraph 7(2)(c) have been paid in part, specify the amount that remains unpaid, as at a time which is—
(i) specified in the notice to keeper, and
(ii) no later than the end of the day before the day on which the notice is either sent by post or, as the case may be, handed to or left at a current address for service for the keeper (see sub-paragraph (4));
(e) state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper—
(i) to pay the unpaid parking charges; or
(ii) if the keeper was not the driver of the vehicle, to notify the creditor of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and to pass the notice on to the driver;
(f) warn the keeper that if, at the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to keeper is given—
(i) the amount of the unpaid parking charges (as specified under paragraph (c) or (d)) has not been paid in full, and
(ii) the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver,the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid;
(g) inform the keeper of any discount offered for prompt payment and the arrangements for the resolution of disputes or complaints that are available;
(h) identify the creditor and specify how and to whom payment or notification to the creditor may be made;
(i) specify the date on which the notice is sent (if it is sent by post) or given (in any other case).

Money...MATTERS

Thanks Coupon-mad, I have to take my hat off to the helpful regulars with all your unrivalled knowledge on PCNs - it's second to none!

I will try to support her as best I can with this as she really struggled with getting a grip on it all and more importantly I hope she gets the desired outcome.

Umkomaas

...... and there it seems to end ......

Any update @Money...MATTERS?