Fine for Paid Parking Ticket - HX Car Park

reysham

So if the driver provides their witness statement, do I need any other statements, and if so what would they be?
I assume I submit a clarification to address the error in the original DS - how detailed does this have to be?
Thanks once again

reysham

Sorry, just seen this.
So:
revise my Witness Statement as Keeper to clarify that, after a family conference and actual conversation, and a look at my Location History, I was not the driver at the time.
I submit my Location History in addition to what I've outlined in a previous post.

Then I'm done?

1505grandad

@OP

BTW until I noticed the D/WS conflict I was going to respond to your post #10 re Lay Rep:-

Your post #10:-

"Thank you!

AoS complete!

More questions:
- Can I have my partner represent me if we get to court (I'm a terrible public speaker and even my writing/legalise is being checked and verified by my partner)?
- Can witness statement be my own or can it only be a third party?"


Please note (if this is actually relevant to your proposed action):-

If a Lay Rep is required they do not have RoA if they are a witness providing a statement in support.

reysham

OK - I'm assuming that means they can't represent me...Am I right?
And if that's the case...realistically, how much actual speaking am I likely to have to do?

reysham

Can #4 from my statement read as follows:

4. Following further investigation into my whereabouts on 02nd October 2018, at the time of the alleged parking incident, I can confirm that I was not driving the car as I had first assumed, but seeing to my employment responsibilities within the inner-city area of Leicester. This is evident from my Location History found on Page 1 of xxAppendix. After speaking with my partner during the evidence-gathering process, I am aware that my partner had taken my then 3-year-old son into the city centre after leaving her own workplace sometime in the early afternoon.

Le_Kirk

Why do the claimant's job for them and effectively name the driver?

reysham

I'm not sure how to go about this...Please advise as my deadline is mid-October for submission (so send off will have to be 8th or 9th to arrive in time)

reysham

Something like this, with information from the Driver within this (Keeper's) Witness Statement, outlining the events? And then not submit a Driver Witness Statement?

4. Following further investigation into my whereabouts on 02nd October 2018, at the time of the alleged parking incident, I can confirm that I was not driving the car as I had first assumed, but seeing to my employment responsibilities within the inner-city area of Leicester. This is evident from my Location History found on Page 1 of xxAppendix. During the evidence-gathering process, I am aware that the driver had driven into the city centre with a young toddler sometime in the early afternoon.

Coupon-mad

Looks good to me.

reysham

Hi,

What does RoA mean (I've looked this up and i am finding lots of definitions)? And how does it affect having/not having a lay rep (Can my partner, whether named or unnamed as driver, represent me as keeper)?

And I'd appreciate feedback on the following Witness Statement. Will the following suffice with the evidence outlined within the content below, or should I still submit the Driver's statement? Thank You.

1. I, xxx xxxx, of xxx xxx xxxx , will say as follows:


2. I am the registered keeper of the vehicle in this matter.

3. Attached to this statement is a paginated bundle of documents marked Appendix to which I will refer.

4. Following further investigation into my whereabouts on xx xxx xxxx, at the time of the alleged parking incident, I can confirm that I was not driving the car as I had first assumed, but seeing to my employment responsibilities within the inner-city area of xxxx. This is evident from my Location History found on Page 1 of Appendix. During the evidence-gathering process, I am aware that the driver had driven into the city centre with a young toddler sometime in the early afternoon.

5. I received PCN:xxxxx approximately 10-12 days after the alleged parking incident. The PCN states that the contravention was ‘[failure] to purchase a pay and display ticket within the 10-minute grace period allowed’. This PCN is at Page 2 of UIAppendix.

6. The parking ticket that had been purchased for the day and car park in question was still in the car, which disproved the PCN’s conjecture, so I appealed the PCN using the company’s online system.

7. The appeal was rejected, and the legal procedures began. My Defence Statement outlined my findings and arguments against the PCN’s validity.

8. In support of my Defence, I attach an example of the Beavis Signage and a Point-of-View photograph of the signage in the xx xx Car Park at Pages 3-5 of the Appendix. This highlights the poor visibility of the Claimant’s signage, and that the signage did not make it clear whether the parking period within the paid time included time spent after entering the site via its ANPR cameras looking for a space and parking in it and locating and reading the terms and conditions and deciding to accept them, and time spent when leaving the site via the same cameras exiting the space, driving round the car park's one way system and then driving out onto a public road. It is trite law that any uncertainty in a contract should be resolved against the person who offered it under the contra preferentem rule

9. I would also like to point to the improbability of entry, parking and ticket purchase at a Pay and Display machine within a period 60 -120 seconds as a lone adult, never mind in the presence of a toddler who needs to be removed from a car and strapped into a pushchair. This data from the PDT machine calls the accuracy of the machine or the ANPR into question. The data dump is on Page 6 of Appendix.

10. I have considered the Code of Practice ("CoP") of the British Parking Association ("BPA"), of which the Claimant is an accredited member. A copy of paragraph 13 of the CoP, which relates to grace periods, is at page 7 of Appendix. In order to be an accredited member of the BPA, compliance with the CoP is compulsory, and a copy of paragraphs 4.1 and 6 of the CoP is at Pages 8 and 9 of Appendix respectively. Paragraph 13 of the CoP clearly states that a grace period is to be applied to parking. The CoP makes clear that such grace periods are to be applied both at the start of any parking period and also at the end of any parking period. The whole point of these grace periods is to allow drivers time to find a parking space, to read the signage, and to exit the car park once they have finished parking. Grace periods are not defined, but the CoP requires them to be "a minimum of 10 minutes" either side of the actual parking (paragraphs 13.2 and 13.4)

11. In this case, the data produced and relied upon by the Claimant shows that the period passing between the car entering and leaving was 12 minutes. Applying the "minimum" 10 minutes either side of the parking, the minimum total grace period allowed by the Claimant under its own compulsory CoP was 20 minutes. The driver’s efforts in purchasing a ticket for two hours of parking, and returning to the car in time to leave within 12 minutes of the end time highlights the effort made in leaving with a toddler within a reasonable grace period.

12. At Page 10 of Appendix is a Google Earth aerial photograph of the car park. I have marked, in red, an approximation of the parking bays, and used yellow dashes to mark the route taken to exit the car park safely. The exit area is marked in blue and the NCP car park and other city centre car parking is marked in green. It is visible from this image that conditions in the car park for manoeuvring and parking are very tight; parking bays are narrow, as is the distance of the ‘road’/route that drivers must use to navigate the car park. Drivers need to take extra care when reversing or driving to avoid scratching or damaging other vehicles and take pedestrians into consideration too. Multiple manoeuvres are required to turn the tight corner as one leaves, adding to the time taken to leave once out of the parking bay. An un-editable video is on the USB attached to Page 11 of Appendix. It demonstrates the care with which one must drive around the car park itself. The video has been taken by a passenger sat directly behind the driver.

13. The ANPR capture of the car upon exit shows that the brake was being used. Putting aside the question of accuracy of time, the brake lights indicate the need for caution. This is because, due to the car park being adjacent to an inner-city centre road, drivers must take extra care when joining the traffic, and can, on particularly busy days, wait a few minutes before being able to leave the car park’s grounds. This picture is at Page 12 of Appendix.

14. Taking the presence of a vulnerable person, the serious matter of the accuracy of the machines at the car park on the day in question, and the conditions both inside and outside the car park, I believe that the period of time that the driver was on site after the parking period is not only reasonable but sensible and safe as a responsible driver and parent.

15. I would like to reiterate that the recommended grace period is a minimum of 10 minutes, and the Claimant should have exercised common sense and applied a greater grace period than the minimum to take into account the prevailing circumstances at the time. The issue the court is being asked to deal with is de minimis and the court's valuable time should not have been taken up with this matter.

Statement of Truth:

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