Parking Eye Fine

sweetgem

By the way does the costs schedule get sent to the court and ParkingEye. or do I just produce it on the day

Le_Kirk

Current advice is to send with WS and evidence but if you have already sent those, then send to court and claimant a few days before the hearing.

Coupon-mad

Make sure you take the court's file in person, or someone does, NOT BY EMAIL.

sweetgem

Coupon-mad wrote: »

If you were the driver then say you were the driver, in your WS, yes.

Attach the CRA 2015 Schedule 2 and highlight the 4 paras I told you to, as well as Lord Denning's red hand rule (Google it and use it).
Yes, it probably is, but MAINLY your issue is the lack of prominence and transparency of the keypad, and I reckon at Christmas the hotel has covered the sign & keypad up and you can take some good photos! IMHO the car park signs are not the issue.
Leave it out, or mention it as an aside. They DO NOT have to send any NTK signed for, and no PPC ever does, and saying stuff like that simply makes it easy for their rep to answer and take the Judge off on a tangent that makes them look reasonable.

This case is ALL about the hidden keypad, and the breach of the CRA paras 6, 10, 14 and 18 and the failure to meet Lord Denning's red hand rule, due to positively hiding the mechanism inside the hotel, such that guests are duped.

Hi I was wondering if you can help. I attached the 4 CRA paras as I was requested to do so. But my comprehension is not great and I cannot get the gist of them. Please could you explain them to me in layman’s terms. Just so that I am prepared. Lord Dennings right hand rule seems short, clear and understandable (although I hope they don’t go into the case where it was originally used as it will go right over my head and I won’t have a clue as to what to say). .

Coupon-mad

Copy para 6, 10, 14 and 18 from schedule 2 of the CRA, here now, please.

Then tell us what is it about each one that you don't understand, as this is hard for me to understand because they are written in non-legalese English and say very clearly what the issues are with notices and terms that fall within each para.

Le_Kirk

Lord Dennings right hand rule seems short, clear and understandable.............

........... except it is Lord Denning's RED HAND rule!

Umkomaas

Or is it The Peaky Blinders' Red Right Hand!

MistyZ

I can see that the exact meaning of the following may not be obvious. Point out which bits you don't get as soon as you can:

SCHEDULE 2
Consumer contract terms which may be regarded as unfair

PART 1
List of terms
6A term which has the object or effect of requiring a consumer who fails to fulfil his obligations under the contract to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation.

10A term which has the object or effect of irrevocably binding the consumer to terms with which the consumer has had no real opportunity of becoming acquainted before the conclusion of the contract.

14A term which has the object or effect of giving the trader the discretion to decide the price payable under the contract after the consumer has become bound by it, where no price or method of determining the price is agreed when the consumer becomes bound.

18A term which has the object or effect of obliging the consumer to fulfil all of the consumer’s obligations where the trader does not perform the trader’s obligations.

My interpretation:

6. a term in the contract which means that if the consumer does not abide by the contract (for example, if a motorist does not enter their registration in a keypad) then they will be charged a lot more than the cost of the thing or service they were getting (for example a parking charge much larger than the usual cost of using a car park).

10. a term in the contract which means that a consumer has to follow a whole lot of terms which they haven't had the time or opportunity to read.

14. a term which means that the consumer may end up having to pay more for the thing or service than they think, as decided by the trader.

18. a term which means that the consumer has to do everything right but the trader doesn't.

Coupon-mad

Yep, that sums up the interpretations.

And this one is not always used in defences:

18. a term which means that the consumer has to do everything right but the trader doesn't.

But in your case, para 18 can be argued to apply to the fact that the trader (deliberately or negligently) hid the keypad! They failed in their obligations to draw the very mechanism the consumer needs to be 'in-your-face prominent' to the driver's attention. Thus, their failure breaches para 18 of the 'grey list' (= Schedule 2 - the list of terms that are likely to be unfair) and para 71 of the Act says that a Court MUST consider the test of fairness whether or not a consumer mentions it (so there is no problem if your defence didn't talk about it).

sweetgem

Thank you so much that makes it a lot clearer and I am able to relate to the paras now and make them correspond to the points I was making in the witness statement. I was finding this difficult to do. It is not always so black and white for me until someone breaks it down for me. Even though it is written in non-legalised English, for me I was not able to relate it to how it would fit in with my defence so I really appreciate you doing this for me. :):)