Horizon Simple Procedure Scotland

PA353

Hi


Horizon parking have filed a 'Simple Procedure' against myself as the registered keeper in my local sheriff court. The offences are 4 tickets for failure to pay for parking totalling £440. The dates of the offences are around June 2014 (so over 4 years ago) due to timescales I genuinely have no idea who was driving on those dates - I have never parked in the car park in question so I know for sure it was not me. Below are the details of the claim they have made.

D1. "What is the background to your claim"

“The Claimants are managers of a Pay & Display car park situated at Atlantic Square, York Street, Glasgow, G2 8JQ on behalf of the owners and by dint thereof have right and title inter alia to (a) occupy same, (b) provide a parking control service and there and (c) collect all unpaid parking charges that might arise from time to time at the car park. The Respondent parked his xxx motor vehicle registration number **** *** at said car park on 4 occasions without displaying a valid ticket and/or parking out of hours and/or Pay & Display ticket expired and/or out of marked bay and/or failure to pay for parking and/or obstructive parking. they did so notwithstanding the Claimants displaying signage which warned a Parking Charge Notice of £70 would be issued in the event of one or more of the foregoing contraventions occurring. Parking Charges were issued by the claimants to the Respondent in respect of 4 contraventions. Each parking charge was in the sum of £70. Failing payment of that sum within 28 days the Respondent incurred further costs as notified in the said signage of £40 for each parking charge. In the circumstances the Claimants seek payment from the Respondent of the sum of £440 which is the amount sued for.”

D2. "Where did this take place?"

The parties are as designed in the instance. The Claimants have no reason to believe that any agreement exists prorogation the subject matter of this cause to any other Court, nor do they have reason to believe that any proceedings many be pending before another Court involving the same cause of action between the same parties as those names herein. This Court has jurisdiction since the Respondent has resided at the address in the instance for three months immediately prior to the raising of this action and is domiciled there. The nature and circumstances of the said residence indicate that the Respondent has a substantial connection with Scotland. The Court accordingly has jurisdiction in terms of Section 41 to 46 of, Article 52 of Schedules 1 and 8 to, the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgements Act 1982.

D5. "If your claim is successful, what do you want from the Respondent?"

"1. To grant Decree against the Respondent for payment to the Claimants of the sum of £440 together with interest thereon at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of citation to follow hereon until payment.
2. To find the Respondent liable in the expenses of this action"

D7. "Why should your claim be successful?"

"My claim should be successful because the Respondent breached the terms agreed to on parking the vehicle in the car park and the sum sued for is not excessive."

D8. "What steps have you taken, if any, to try to settle the dispute with the Respondent?"

"To try and settle the dispute I have taken the following steps. The Claimants have made repeated application to the Respondent for payment, but the Respondent refuses or delays to do so and accordingly the present action has been rendered necessary."


I have responded to the court advising that I was not the driver of the vehicle and the case should be dismissed as per VCS V Robb. The sheriff has now set up a case management discussion in a couple of weeks and has encouraged me to contact Horizon in the meantime to try to settle the dispute.


Unsure why the case was not dismissed as to my knowledge there is no keeper liability in Scotland and I was not the driver.


So I suppose my question is should I be contacting Horizon to try and settle or just turn up for the case management discussion stating I was not the driver? A bit reluctant to try to settle as I was not the driver and therefore don't want to be paying anything but I will have to take a day unpaid leave from work to attend court and possibly another day if it goes to a hearing.


From looking at previous threads there were 2 very similar cases involving Horizon (in all likelihood in the same car park) but unsure how either of these finally panned out



Any help in what I should/shouldn't be mentioning in my answer to these questions would be appreciated.

waamo

Horizon will be arguing that on the balance of probabilities you were the driver. They will claim it is unlikely that on four different occasions a car which is registered to you was driven by someone else.

You need to persuade a sheriff that they are incorrect in their assumption. If you can evidence that on at least one occasion it wasn't you then you should win.

twhitehousescat

£70 +£40 exceeds the charge prescribed by both the government and the BPA

the charge should be Max of £100 with a 40% discount if paid in "x" days

there statement

"Each parking charge was in the sum of £70. Failing payment of that sum within 28 days the Respondent incurred further costs as notified in the said signage of £40 for each parking charge. "

clearly states that they are breaking the law , as above £100 is max

nosferatu1001

Indeed, the further costs needs explaining. I bet the signs dont actually state £40 - have they submitted copies of signs to you?

If you can prove yo uwere not there, thats great. If you can supply a lis tof all possible drivers from that time - plus including Drive other Vevhicles cover persons - PLUS why it is usual for your vehicle to be used by different drivers without you needing to keep a record of their journeys, that would be persuasive.

You shoudl also ask why they delayed for this many years - it makes it impossible to identitfy drivers now, even if you had any obligation to do so.

PA353

They have included copy of signage in the claim, it does state £40 admin if not payed in 28 days.

Due to timescales I am unable to recollect my whereabouts so can’t prove I wasn’t there (not unreasonable after 4+ years)

I will be able to provide my insurance documents showing 1 additional driver plus there were couple of users who use the car under their own insurance, neither of them can remember parking in said car park to their knowledge.

twhitehousescat

the signage is illegal , the max fee is £100 + any additional legal costs

the £40 is a force as one single letter , would not incure the same costs as 500 letters and debt collectors over say 5 yrs

DoaM

Breach of the BPA code of practice does not of itself point to illegality, just breach of the CoP.

@OP ... do you have an Android phone linked to a Google account? If yes, have you had one for the past 4+ years? if yes then Google location history may help you.

PA353

Have I phone but only since May 2017

AberdeenTyke

A couple of things strike me on this one. 1 - Parking Companies DO have teeth in Scotland and DO take court action. 2 - the silence of the gobs on the biggest posters on here are now deafening. You know, the ones who's arrogance knows no bounds, the ones who state no company will ever do court in Scotland and they can only go after the keeper etc etc. The ones who "advise" to do nothing north of the border. What a load of cack. The "advice" on here is now dreadful, and dangerous.

beamerguy

AberdeenTyke wrote: »

A couple of things strike me on this one. 1 - Parking Companies DO have teeth in Scotland and DO take court action. 2 - the silence of the gobs on the biggest posters on here are now deafening. You know, the ones who's arrogance knows no bounds, the ones who state no company will ever do court in Scotland and they can only go after the keeper etc etc. The ones who "advise" to do nothing north of the border. What a load of cack. The "advice" on here is now dreadful, and dangerous.

Care to say which parking company you are from ?
This is not a thread for propaganda

waamo

AberdeenTyke wrote: »

A couple of things strike me on this one. 1 - Parking Companies DO have teeth in Scotland and DO take court action. 2 - the silence of the gobs on the biggest posters on here are now deafening. You know, the ones who's arrogance knows no bounds, the ones who state no company will ever do court in Scotland and they can only go after the keeper etc etc. The ones who "advise" to do nothing north of the border. What a load of cack. The "advice" on here is now dreadful, and dangerous.

I've said it before and I will say it again where there are multiple tickets there is always the risk of court action in Scotland.

Persuading a sheriff that the registered keeper wasn't the driver on multiple occasions is an uphill struggle. Credibility plays a large part in civil proceedings.

The amount of companies that currently go to court in Scotland is minimal, although this can change.

On a single parking event where no driver is named the companies face an uphill task. If the registered keeper wasn't the driver and can evidence this then the ppc faces an impossible task.

Bearing this in mind my advice remains the same despite your assertions it is incorrect.