County Court Claim CEL Blue badge

Le_Kirk

Just because a defence is based on a Forum assisted template doesn't make it wrong in law and, by the way, it is the PPC or their solicitors saying this, NOT the judge. If you used a Bargepole defence, it was written by a lawyer!

jungalow

Ah great thank you!

I'm having a major wobble here and wanted to ask a question which I'm betting everyone will say NO!!!! to but I wanted to check before I lose anymore sleep.

Tomorrow is there 7 day deadline for a final settlement fee of £100. Is it worth me emailing them saying that I would rather avoid going to court as it means cancelling a day of my treatment and admitting that things could have been easier had I admitted that I was the driver and brought up the issue of my disability from the off and seeing what they offer me in order to just get this over and done with??

If I did this, yes I would be admitting that they were right (which hits me to the core) but it also means that I don't miss a day of treatment which I really really need to get by at the moment and it also means that I'm not at risk of paying way over £100 should we lose.

Please help?

Coupon-mad

No is the answer to that question!

Is the Defendant your husband (registered keeper)? He had no obligation to name the driver. This is not a failure on his part, he is entitled to defend a case as keeper.

The things I'm still uncertain and feeling insecure that they are going to really press home the fact that we didn't identify that I was the driver and also that we used an internet template which we adapted to suit our case.

Neither matters.

Everyone here uses an internet template like you did, adapted to suit!

So have another look at LoP5's thread and how to dissect their useless 'evidence'.

Re your own evidence, your husband will need pics of the signs where you parked, and:

You had a right to a reasonable adjustment of time and can use the EHRC Code of Practice for Service Providers to prove this right, as well as the Blue Badge and evidence of severe mobility impairment slowing you down enough that an extra hour (plus the usual grace period) is not excessive.

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/publication-download/services-public-functions-and-associations-statutory-code-practice

Search that document for the word 'tours' and the phrase 'INDIRECT DISCRIMINATION'

And here is what happened in a case where the right to more parking time was litigated:

https://www.wake-smith.co.uk/news/council-car-park-case-settled-a-victory-for-blue-badge-holders/

https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/disabled-campaigners-claim-norwich-parking-victory-1-777815

As a result: ''Norwich City Council announced it was changing its car parking charges so users who hold blue badges get an hour’s free parking for every hour they buy''.

All the above go into your evidence pack, along with the BPA CoP page that says:

https://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/BPA_AOS_CODE_OF_PRACTICE_CURRENT.pdf

18.9 So that disabled motorists can decide whether they want to use the site, there must be at least one sign containing the terms and conditions for parking that can be viewed without needing to leave the vehicle. Ideally this sign must be close to any parking bays set aside for disabled motorists.

jungalow

Hi!

So I'm at court. Not had a great morning at all. Judge hadn't read any paperwork before hand and cel sent a paralegal who was only just qualified enough to speak on their behalf on the day. The judge says whilst he's sympathetic to my disability he doesn't necessarily agree that I have been discriminated against and that if I was going to push this defence and the equality act then they would have to schedule another hearing for 2-3 hrs on another day. I need help because:

The judge said that cel were not prepared for this defence and asked her to go and call them and ask if they now wanted to drop it. They said whilst they understand my disability they were going for my husband as keeper and not me.

The judge said that he would most likely only push for us to pay the court fee and the £100 initial penalty NOT any of the other charges like debt collectors etc. And has asked us to consider if it is worth pushing and potentially that amount increasing a LOT if it is going to stress me out or make me ill or miss appointments etc. I have a huge problem with this as it's basically saying give in to the bullies.

I've asked the paralegal to call them again and say that I feel like pushing this to the next level and that the judge said they'd likely only get £100 out of it and she says she can't get through to them but she suspects they would push up until the last for the full amount of £192 plus court fees (I don't know where this amount has come from as everything has said £267.)

My gut is telling myself and my husband to fight this. It's wrong! If you can't physically move the vehicle at 90 minutes you shouldn't be charged and as a disabled person where circumstances like they may arise or you may need more time to walk around, they should take that into consideration.

They obviously wouldn't have accepted any appeal so that has made me feel a bit stronger about the fact we ignored alll of the correspondence.

The judge however is warning us that this is a legal not a moral issue and that on the grounds of the law if I overstayed I should pay regsddless of circumstance. He even said in a court of law if someone had been knocked over by a car in the car park and was being treated at 90 minutes they would still be liable to pay the ticket.

I'm now in a situation where I either pay the £100 or I go for it.i haven't been to the press yet, pushed this with the businesses on site or the landowner and feel I still have some cards up my sleeve but I'm wary because the judge has made it seem like it isn't black and white and that I may end up paying a lot of money potentially.

The whole thing has been a joke as far as disability is allowed as I couldn't get my mobility trolley in the room and there were boxes stacked up outside that meant I couldn't get in without nearly falling !!!! over face! I had to cling to the desks to get in and sit down!

It's been very stressful and emotional as I have been made to feel like I am just playing the disability card because the judge hadn't read any of the pack I sent through with evidence and acted like none of the rules apply because they are a private landownrr and not a public service (he said this in relation to the Helen dolphin case).

I'm ready to email the papers, disability charities you name it as if this was my child or my grandma is be livid and I feel it's so unjust. Question is should I or am I blinded by my ow. Passion for the subject and being a fool who'll end up paying for it??

Help!!

Coupon-mad

Judge is wrong:

none of the rules apply because they are a private landownrr and not a public service (he said this in relation to the Helen dolphin case).

The judge however is warning us that this is a legal not a moral issue and that on the grounds of the law if I overstayed I should pay regsddless of circumstance.

Equality Act 2010 requires any fixed policies (including fixed time limits) to be adjusted to account for the needs of disabled people:

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/servicescode_0.pdf

Search that document for the word TOURS and (separately) the words indirect discrimination (where a service provider has a duty to the disabled population at large and CANNOT be heard to say that they ''didn't know on the day as their ANPR cameras son't differentiate''!).

On the grounds of the law, they CANNOT impose the same time limit on you!!

Look at the TOURS example.

That document is NOT advisory guidance.

It's the law - that is a STATUTORY code of practice re the EA, breach of which means a service provider is breaking the law.

THIS RELATES TO SERVICE PROVIDERS SAME AS TO COUNCILS.

ANY PUBLIC-FACING COMPANY IS A SERVICE PROVIDER, HERE IS THE EQUALITY ACT:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/part/3

29
Provision of services, etc.
(1)A person (a “service-provider”) concerned with the provision of a service to the public or a section of the public (for payment or not) must not discriminate against a person requiring the service by not providing the person with the service.

And in the EHRC Code that I linked first, it is defined, as to WHO THE LAW RELATES TO:

Services to the public
3.6
The Act imposes obligations on everyone concerned with the provision of services to the public, or to a section of the public, whether in the private, public or voluntary sectors. It does not matter if services are provided free of charge, such as access to a shopping mall, or in return for payment, for example, a meal in a restaurant.

Under the Act, the provision of services to the public includes the provision of goods or facilities. Throughout this Code, unless otherwise indicated, reference to provision of services includes provision of goods or provision of facilities.

Show the Judge.

State that if CEL are not prepared for the case then that is the CLAIMANT'S OWN FAULT and it should be struck out, as they 'knew or should have known' about the protected characteristics of the driver/passenger (whichever) and the EA is clear that this £100 charge, and refusal to move the 90 minute goalposts - as unlawful EVEN IF THEY DID NOT KNOW ABOUT AN INDIVIDUAL'S DISABILITY NEED.

That is what 'indirect discrimination' is all about - the public AT LARGE (not individuals).

Also, whilst they are going for your husband, the EA prevails as it's statute law.

If the C object to this 'new info' then tell them they cannot expect you to serve & file the EA 2010, as it is enshrined as part of long established statute law (even the DDA before it, had the same info, going back DECADES) and disability law is nothing new to a service provider - who MUST abide by their legal duties.

IF YOU LOSE THIS CASE, ASK THE JUDGE FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL IT AS HE HAS MISINTERPRETED THE EQUALITY ACT AND YOU FILED THE INFO IN EVIDENCE.

DO NOT LEAVE THE ROOM UNTIL:

(A) You have won and got your costs granted (make sure you ask, if you win), or

(B) If you lose, ask the Judge then and there to appeal on the grounds of the EHRC statutory Code and the Equality Act 2010 requirements being misinterpreted as only relating to Councils.

jungalow

Thank you so much coupon mad! I've read through everything you've said and it makes total sense.tbe judge refused to give this more time yesterday so adjourned and alloted a 2-3 he slot which we shall hear about in due course. I asked CEL rep to contact her boss and say that we were likely to push for the longer heading and that in the meantime we would be contacting the companies on site, the landowner, disability charities, the press and anyone else we could and see if they still felt like pushing. She tried but her boss didn't get back to her and we couldn't sit around waiting any longer so it's been left as adjourned. We will both get a chance to respond to each other after today and add any furthee evidence we wish but I'm just hoping that in the meantime they decide to either send us further offers or send a letter sayinf they are giving up. As we left court we stopped and conveniently hugged and said "yes let's do this and push to the end, it's the right thing to do" as she walked past and she was obviously shaken. It's been a whirlwind 24 hrs really and although part of me is kicking myself that I didn't over prepare and instead was naive for thinking it would be straight forward and the other part is thankful that I did as I still feel I have quite a few cards left to play.

Thank you so much for all of the above. When the weekend is over I shall be devoting some serious time to trawling through everything and contacting press, advice bureau, charities etc and getting a huge number of kickass ducks in a row.

It's not how I wanted it to go but I've begun this journey and if this were my grandma, child or someone more vulnerable than myself I'd be adament that they should fight so, now I know my husband is totally behind and beside me too, I'm gonna go for it! (Although it would be lovely if they just threw it out too!!!)

jungalow

Also the more I think about how unprepared and unprofessional the whole thing was the Moe angry I get!! They kept saying that as a layperson I'm only doing my best but I think I did a better job than then considering I was actually prepared and had read everything!!! I have never felt more "judged" as a person than I did in that room yesterday and I really felt they were insinuating I had just played the disability card rather than me being legitimately against the ruling. I didn't feel like I was sat on a level playing field at all!

Coupon-mad

it's been left as adjourned.

We will both get a chance to respond to each other after today and add any further evidence we wish

Come back here before you need to respond again, and remind us what you ALREADY provided in evidence (e.g. the EHRC COP for Service providers?). Exactly what is already in evidence, and what is missing from what I said above, what needs adding do you think?

I am keen to help you demolish their arguments and I hope they are reading this and give up.

A service provider cannot break disability law and hold a keeper liable for the lawful, allowed right to more time) actions of someone with protected characteristics!

Did the Judge say that costs 'were reserved', so that you can claim them later?

jungalow

Hi,

So I'm raring to go! Plan today is to call the Equality Advisory Service to get there opinion on everything and then start drafting a document which very clearly sets out the law for both the judge and CEL seeing as they haven't read through any of my evidence and need it in black and white. I feel like the judge is already biased as he was looking with a view to me being wrong rather than impartially, his attitude just spoke volumes I felt.

With regards to CEL I want to play them at their own game and in the meantime, before we receive word from the court, send them a few choice letters just explaining the steps I am taking in the meantime (disability charities, press etc) and see if they progress to any form of offer etc. I would prefer not to go back to court if I'm honest, but am willing to go and kick butt if I need to, its just unnecessary stress that I don't particularly need.

This is what our evidence pack contained on the day although NONE of it was read by the judge or CEL before the hearing so they were utterly unprepared and didn't have time to read through it in the hour we had alloted to us:

Contents of Evidence Pack

1. Witness Statement - (Registered Keeper of Vehicle and Defendant)
2. Witness Statement - (Driver of Vehicle)
3. Images of General Signage
4. Images of Signage from designated Disabled bay (including image of bay)
5. POFA 2012 Schedule 4
6. POPLA Annual Report 2015 [Abridged] 'Understanding Keeper Liability'
7. BPA Code of Practise [Abridged]
8. EHRC Statutory Code [Abridged]
9. Copy of Helen Dolphin v. Norwich City Council
10. Copy of Blue Badge
11. Correspondence from CEL

Castle

Please remove the RK's and driver's name from your post.