Court date set - witness statement - feedback pls

bryan_the_dog

ta again, amendments made

Witness Statement of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

1. I am the defendant in this case and the facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. I am an unrepresented consumer who has never attended the county court before.

2. I parked at the xxxxxxx Car Park, monitored by Premier Parking Solutions (PPS) on xxxxx-2014 whereby I paid for a pay and display ticket at 14.42.

3. At 14.42 I paid £1.30, as seen in image 1.

4. My reason being as per the tariff displayed in image 2, up to 15 mins 30p, £1.00 per hour, hence I paid for 1 hour 15 mins; the signage does not state theses tariffs are not cumulative. I believe the signage is inadequate.

5. Therefore I was unaware I had only been credited with 1 hour and therefore my ticket, image 1, expired at 15.42

6. When I returned to my vehicle at 15.48, 6 mins after the ticket had expired I had received a Parking Charge Notice.
I had overstayed 6 mins. The industry standard British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Conduct states

13.2 If the parking location is one where parking is normally permitted, you must allow the driver a reasonable grace period in addition to the parking event before enforcement action is taken. In such instances the grace period must be a minimum of 10 minutes.

13.4 You should allow the driver a reasonable period to leave the private car park after the parking contract has ended, before you take enforcement action. If the location is one where parking is normally permitted, the Grace Period at the end of the parking period should be a minimum of 10 minutes.

In addition the International Parking Community (IPC) Code of Conduct, to which PPS is a member states -

15.2 Drivers must be allowed a minimum period of 10 minutes to leave a site after a pre-paid or permitted period of parking has expired.

7. I immediately appealed the Notice as per PPS procedure on the grounds of the aforementioned mitigating circumstances and secondly, with no legal knowledge myself and receiving no legal advice, that the penalty of £100 was disproportionate. The appeal was rejected.

8. I then appealed to POPLA (Parking on Private Land Appeals) on 25/02/14; believing they would be sympathetic to the 6 minute overstay and the predatory actions of PPS. Again with no legal knowledge my appeal was poorly constructed whereby in addition to the aforementioned grounds of appeal I argued there was no loss of earnings to the landowner of my 6 minute overstay in a half empty car park. This appeal was also rejected.

In pursuing this rejection PPS included a witness statement on behalf of Mr xxxxxxx, the landowner; page ; note point 10.
10. The Operator is authorised by the Landowner to pursue the outstanding parking charges in accordance with the British Parking Association Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice.
The code which clearly states a minimum 10 minute grace period.
9. I have then, in the subsequent 4 years received a multitude of harassment letters demanding various amounts of extortionate fees in the region of £270, threatening me with CCJ’s and repossession of my family home.

Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA 2012) states that the maximum sum that can be recovered is the sum on the Notice to Keeper.

10. On 3rd July 2018 I then received a ‘letter of claim’ from BW Legal page ,
The Claim Form issued by BW Legal was not correctly filed under The Practice Direction. Practice Direction 22 requires that a statement of case on behalf of a company must be signed by a person holding a senior position and state the position. If the party is legally represented, the legal representative may sign the statement of truth but in his own name and not that of his firm or employer. This document was signed BW Legal.
Also note heading Particulars of Debt and its vagueness; it does not state a time or a place, nor suggest any evidence; this an example of the serial speculative litigant which issues a large number of draft particulars. This does not comply with pre action obligations set out in the Practice Direction – Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols.

6. Where there is a relevant pre-action protocol, the parties should comply with that protocol before commencing proceedings. Where there is no relevant pre-action protocol, the parties should exchange correspondence and information to comply with the objectives in paragraph 3, bearing in mind that compliance should be proportionate. The steps will usually include—
(a) the claimant writing to the defendant with concise details of the claim. The letter should include the basis on which the claim is made, a summary of the facts, what the claimant wants from the defendant, and if money, how the amount is calculated;
(b) the defendant responding within a reasonable time - 14 days in a straight forward case and no more than 3 months in a very complex one. The reply should include confirmation as to whether the claim is accepted and, if it is not accepted, the reasons why, together with an explanation as to which facts and parts of the claim are disputed and whether the defendant is making a counterclaim as well as providing details of any counterclaim; and
(c) the parties disclosing key documents relevant to the issues in dispute.

I emailed BW Legal to this fact requesting more information which I am clearly entitled to under paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction. I also need it in order to comply with my own obligations under paragraph 6(b), however it was not forthcoming.

In addition it was with interest that I listened to Rt Hon Stephen Doughty MP address the House of Commons on 2nd Feb 2018 whereby he highlighted BW Legal, referred to their use of ‘roboclaims’ and reported that he had raised concerns with the Solicitors Regulatory Authority for their failure to comply with the regulatory environment for solicitors and best practice. And again on 19 July 2018 he reported to the House that ‘BW Legal regularly issues 10,000 county court judgements a month, and is known to have issued 28,000 in one month. A significant proportionate of them relate to parking. They are jamming up our court system, and are often totally unjustified.’

11. In September 2018 I received Notice of Proposed Allocation to the Small Claims Track from the Northampton County Court Business Centre. Unfortunately I misinterpreted this as more harassment for payment from BW Legal and did not give this document the diligence it merited. This was due partly to the Directions questionnaire on behalf of PPS again being signed BW Legal.

12. In October 2018 I received an offer to mediate by telephone with BW Legal on behalf of PPS; to which I replied I was willing to participate in order to put an end to the harassment, however due to my job as a merchant seaman, whereby I work xxxxxxxxxxxxx a mutual time and date could not be agreed.

13. I would like to point out that the Parking Eye v Beavis case does not apply for various reasons, for example, this car park does not offer a free parking period, the sum pursued exceeds £100 and this case is also rendered irrelevant due to the claimants own choice of non-POFA documentation.

14. I invite the court to strike out this claim for payment under the following grounds -

(I) Grace Periods – I overstayed 6 mins. The two industry trade bodies, including the IPC, which PPS is a member clearly state a minimum grace period of 10 minutes should be granted.

(II) Inadequate Signage – As previously stated the tariff was not displayed clearly enough to prevent me paying £1.30 to receive 1 hour and 15 mins of parking.

(III) Practice Direction – Pre action Conduct and Protocol Steps before issuing a claim at court. As mentioned the claimant has shown a fragrant disregard for these Protocols throughout this process.

15. I believe the facts stated in this witness statement to be true.