Is it too late?

whitepatch

Just a question, if I now know which parking tickets the CCJs relate to, does my OH need to put anything about them in his WS??

whitepatch

Can someone advise. Should my OH have put a reason as to why he got the parking ticket if we have been sent the photos in witness statement??

Basically on both of them he was loading stuff out the car and that is the only place to not obstruct any other residents. And it also used to be visitors parking. It isn't blocking anyone
. The photos they sent are taken 4 minutes apart. Now when you have a toddler and bags to take up to second floor it will take at least that to take items up and return. There are also no signs there which specify about loading. In fact no signs at all!!

Umkomaas

The Defendant puts in the WS the facts about the event from his/her point of view in his/her own words. Attach evidence to support his/her position. If the photos of the parked vehicle help, then use those, if they don't help, don't use them.

nosferatu1001

Pretty much that
Given loaidng / unloading a la JOPSON should be a key element of the defence, it must be spoken about
State this WAS visitor parking (why was it removed?) and was the most sensible place to unload, that no more timne than was necessary was taken unloading, and so at no point was the vehcile ever parked, as would be commonly understood - you can draw attention ot the fact that on double yellow lines you can load / unload for up to 20 minutes, whereas you are never allowed to park, and there is clearly a difference.
If there are no signs, markings etc wher that is then you also state so.

whitepatch

Umkomaas wrote: »

The Defendant puts in the WS the facts about the event from his/her point of view in his/her own words. Attach evidence to support his/her position. If the photos of the parked vehicle help, then use those, if they don't help, don't use them.

nosferatu1001 wrote: »

Pretty much that
Given loaidng / unloading a la JOPSON should be a key element of the defence, it must be spoken about
State this WAS visitor parking (why was it removed?) and was the most sensible place to unload, that no more timne than was necessary was taken unloading, and so at no point was the vehcile ever parked, as would be commonly understood - you can draw attention ot the fact that on double yellow lines you can load / unload for up to 20 minutes, whereas you are never allowed to park, and there is clearly a difference.
If there are no signs, markings etc wher that is then you also state so.

Should it have gone in the set aside??

whitepatch

So update! From the subject access request to Gladstones, it seems that at some point they got updated details from experian regarding an updated address? Is experian allowed to do this?

I have also found out it looks like they have got a NEW claim registered against my other half. So this makes 3 now!

My oh will fight the third the same as the others!!

whitepatch

So update! From the subject access request to Gladstones, it seems that at some point they got updated details from experian regarding an updated address? Is experian allowed to do this?

I have also found out it looks like they have got a NEW claim registered against my other half. So this makes 3 now! Was registered on 5th December.

My oh will fight the third the same as the others!!

Also in regards to the Gladstones having my OH contact details, they had his email address as they have sent him an email confirming payment of another PCN! This was in September 2016! So they could have contacted him!

nosferatu1001

Yes, of course they can use Experian to get an updated address. It would be remiss of them NOT to use such a ervice when htey know, or should know, the address for service is out of date

I dont know why people think their address cant be, or shouldnt be, found especiually prior to legal proceedings.

whitepatch

nosferatu1001 wrote: »

Yes, of course they can use Experian to get an updated address. It would be remiss of them NOT to use such a ervice when htey know, or should know, the address for service is out of date

I dont know why people think their address cant be, or shouldnt be, found especiually prior to legal proceedings.

I think the point is they have used this trace service in at least early July 2018, so have had updated contact details since then, yet issued papers to the old address twice since.

I shall post my set aside for the third claim soon!

Does anyone know where I can find the foir from DVLA regarding using trace services?

whitepatch

DRAFT ORDER

IN THE COUNTY COURT AT: XXXXXX

UK-Car park Management Ltd (Claimant)

And

MR XXXXX (Defendant)

CLAIM No: XXXX

IT IS ORDERED that:

1. The default judgment dated XXXXX be set aside along with judgement dated XXXX and judgement dated XXXXX which are the subjects of two concurrent set aside applications (see point #7 below).

2. Costs to be reserved.

3. Unless the Claimant serves a copy of the claim form on the Defendant by 4pm on XX/XX/1X paragraph 2 shall cease to have effect and the Claimant shall pay the Defendant's costs summarily assessed at £255 and the claim shall be struck out.

4. If the Claimant serves the claim form as directed in paragraph 3 the Defendant shall file and serve a defence by 4pm on XX/XX/201X.

5. Should the Claimant discontinue the Claim after the CCJ is set aside, paragraph 2 shall cease to have effect and the Claimant shall pay the Defendant's costs summarily assessed at £255 plus the Defendant's costs for attending the hearing.

6. All enforcement be put on hold pending the outcome of the application.

7. The Draft Order for Claim number XXXXXX be merged with claim numberXXXXXX and merged with Claim number XXXXXXX, with one hearing to set aside all three claims.










WITNESS STATEMENT

8. I am XXXXXX and I am the defendant in this matter. This is my supporting statement to my application dated 18th December 2018 requesting to:

a. Set aside the default judgment dated XXXXXXXX as it was defectively served using an old address.
b. Merge the default judgement dated XXXXXX with the default dated XXXXXX and with the default judgement dated XXXXX as the claimant has filed three claims for matters of essentially the same facts. And have one hearing for all three set aside claims.

c. Order for the claimant to pay the defendant £255 as reimbursement for the set aside fee.

d. Order for the original claim to be dismissed.

DEFAULT JUDGMENT

9. I understand that the claimant obtained a default judgment against me on XX December 2018 and XXXXX 2018, and XXXX 2017 which are the subject of concurrent set aside applications. However, it was not served at my current address, therefore I was not aware of the county court judgment until 16/12/2018 when I checked my credit report with Experian.
10. I have never received any correspondence from the claimant, therefore I was never able to challenge the judgment.
11. On 2XXXX8 I emailed the data protection officer at UK-CPM with a subject access request, requesting all details they have regarding any alleged incidents, they have replied with a selection of photos, of very poor quality. According to the court the alleged incident occurred on the XXXXX6. When the ticket was issued; I was temporarily stopped and unloading, in what used to be (according to the lines still faintly present) visitors parking spaces in a complete dead end. At that time of night there are no spaces left and it is the only place to stop without obstructing other residents to unload a car and a toddler. The car was left for no longer than 5 minutes which is a reasonable time to stop (Jopson v Homeguard [2016] B9GF0A9E). The photos I have received from the claimant are taken no more than 3 minutes apart. There are no signs in this area, and certainly none visible at night.
12. On XXXXXX I emailed the data protection officer at Gladstones with a subject access request. They replied on 14/12/2018, showing all correspondence. Their letters show they have had my email address since 13th September 2016, which means they could have contacted me to notify me, when they received no response to their letters at my old address. It also shows they received my updated contact details from Experian prior to submitting any claims with the court. Again this shows they knew my new address, but continued to send to an old address.

13. I moved to a new address on 30th March 2017. In support of this I can provide confirmation of completion statement from solicitors, mortgage statement, and I am present on the electoral role. Bank addresses were also changed around this time.
14. I suggest the claimant did not make reasonable enquiries as to my current address before perusing the court order especially considering they had good reason to believe they did not hold my current contact details. Furthermore, considering they received no response from me to their correspondence this should have been a clear indication of the obsolescence of the address XXXXXXXXX.
15. Although all my details had been changed to my new address, I overlooked my driving licence, this has now been changed in good faith as soon as the issue came to light, there was no attempt to avoid any debt.

16. I believe the claimant has behaved unreasonably by not ensuring they used my correct contact details. According to publicly available information my circumstances are far from being unique. UK Car Park Management Ltd’s persistent failure to use correct and current addresses results in an unnecessary burden for individuals and the justice system.

17. Considering the above I was unable to defend this claim. Therefore, I believe that the default judgment against me was irregular and I respectfully request it is set aside.

MERGE JUDGEMENTS
18. The claimant has now filed three claims for matters of essentially the same facts. As I had moved out of the address the claimant must have had details of a second and third incident (claim XXXXXX and claim XXXXXXX) at the same time they filed claim. I request one hearing to set aside both CCJs and that the Claimant be required to explain why two claims were filed; which not only wastes the court’s resources but has cost me two extra £255 court fees to set aside three claims, when they should have been heard as one matter all along (ref: Johnson v Gore Wood & Co).

ORDER DISMISSING THE CLAIM

19. I further believe that the original parking charge notice has no merit and should thus be dismissed. The claimant is a parking company which seeks to claim for parking charge notices which the claimant believes are due as a result of an alleged breach of contract for parking by a driver.

20. The claimant has obtained details of the vehicle for which the defendant was the registered keeper and used those details to raise a parking charge notice. I dispute this charge in its entirety as I do not know the wording of the contract nor do I know the means by which the contract was alleged to have come into force.

21. If the claimant can evidence that the alleged incident relates to the vehicle XXXXXX any notice to keeper issued by the claimant must comply with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Otherwise, the claimant is required to prove the driver of the vehicle they claim was involved in the alleged incident. I submit that the claimant cannot provide such evidence and further submit that the claimant does not include Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ; wording on the parking charge notices they issue and therefore cannot hold the registered keeper of the vehicle automatically liable.

22. A requirement of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 is that any notice to keeper must be served within 14 days of the date of the alleged incident. Since I have not received any documentation I submit the claimant has not complied with the requirements of the Act and thus cannot claim this charge against me as the registered keeper in any case.
23. There are no terms within the Defendant's tenancy agreement requiring tenants to display parking permits or park in a marked bay, or to pay penalties to third parties, such as the Claimant, for non-display of same, and there is a large body of case law which establishes this.
In Pace v Mr N [2016] C6GF14F0 [2016] it was found that the parking company could not override the tenant's right to park by requiring a permit to park.
In Link Parking v Ms P C7GF50J7 [2016] it was also found that the parking company could not override the tenant's right to park by requiring a permit to park.
24. The residents car park displays unclear, ambiguous, inadequate and lack of International Parking Community (IPC) compliant signage. Therefore making it very difficult to understand where you can park and where not.
25. In Jopson v Homeguard [2016]B9GF0A9E on appeal it was found that the parking company could not stop the tenants right to temporarily stop near the building for loading/unloading.

26. I further submit that the parking charge notice is without merit due to substantial issues in law. This is for the following reasons:

a. Lack of Standing by Claimant: The claimant is not the landowner of the residents car park in question and will have no proprietary interest in it. This means that the claimant, as a matter of law, will have no locus standi to litigate in their own name. Any consideration will have been provided by the landholder and only they would have been able claim for any damages or trespass.

b. No Loss Suffered by Claimant: Their claim is presumably based on damages for alleged breach of contract. It is a fundamental principle of English Law that a party who suffers damages through breach of contract can only seek through court action to be put back in the same position as they would have been if the breach had not occurred. In order to do so they must demonstrate their actual or genuine pre-estimate of loss. I submit that no loss has been suffered by the claimant as a result of any alleged breaches of contract on the part of any driver of the vehicle of which I was the registered keeper. I further submit that any loss to the landowner (which would be the only party able to claim such losses) would be minimal.

c. The Charge is an Unenforceable Penalty: I further submit that the parking charge is nothing but an unenforceable penalty as it is not based on any loss suffered due to the alleged infraction.

d. No Contract with the Claimant: Any contract must have offer, acceptance, and consideration both ways. There would not have been consideration from the claimant to the driver. Therefore, there is no consideration from the driver to UK Car Park Management Ltd.

26. On this basis I believe that the claimant has not provided any reasonable cause of action and thus the claim should be dismissed in its entirety.

27. In order to make informed decisions and statements in my defence as former keeper of the vehicle I will require copies of all paperwork and pictures of all signs from the claimant.

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