Parking eye taking me to court

Allygood100

Yes i sent it to MCOL email. Still not showing as received deadline 11 of this month. I phoned Northampton bussnies County court Centre. They said they running behind but did confirm receiving it. What should i do? Shall i send a quick recorded mail?

Allygood100

Omg i nearly messed up. I made a mistake in the first email i sent wrote the case number wrong. But has sent a new file and its marked received on the MCOL website. And it says the case has been transferred to my local court.

Coupon-mad

Good, so now spend some time reading other people's threads, to prepare well for Witness Statement and evidence stage before your hearing.

Allygood100

Hello gays the my ws if you are kind to check it form me it will be appreciate it. Im 3 weeks from my court date. I know i have to utill 2 weeks from the c date to send it to the court. Do i have to send a copy to the claimant and if yes do i send the evidence to?


In the County Court at XXXXX
Claim No. XXXXXXXX
Between
Civil Enforcement Ltd (Claimant)
and
XXXXXXXXXX (Defendant)

---

Witness Statement

---

1. I am Xxxxxx, of [Address], [Postcode], the Defendant in this matter. I will say as follows:

2. I am a regular visitor to the site in question due to my job as a cabby but I was never made aware of the parking restrictions by the staff or ever saw the parking signs or was I ever been made aware that I had to input my vehicle registration into the hotel lobby iPod . the defendant would like to draw the court attention to the poor signage please see evidence number (A1)

3. On [DATE], I visited the hotel, and parked my vehicle registration no, XXXXX in the car park.

4. visitors are granted exemption from parking charges whilst using the facilities. Evidence of this is contained in a confirmation letter provided by the hotel, dated XXXXX, and attached as Exhibit B.

5. Upon receipt of a parking charge notice from the Claimant, I approached the hotel staff and spoke to the duty manager who agreed with me that parking charge wasn’t right to be issued to me and promised to get it cancelled please see evidence number (A2) , however that didn’t happened. After checking with hotel i learned that that member of staff had left without dealing with it and the claimant elected to pursue this matter via litigation.
6. The allegation appears to be based on images by their ANPR camera at the entrance and exit to
the site. This is merely an image of the vehicle in transit, entering and leaving the car park in
question and is not evidence of the registered keeper 'not purchasing the appropriate parking time'
or of the driver not being a patron of the xxxxxxx.

6. It is my position that, under the doctrine of promissory estoppel, the Claimant has no standing, or cause of action, to litigate in this matter.

7. I invite the Court to dismiss this claim in its entirety, and to award my costs of attendance at the hearing, such as are allowable pursuant to CPR 27.14.

Statement of Truth

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

Signature
Date




1/1

KeithP

At this stage, everything must be sent to both the Claimant and the Court.

Didn't the letter giving you the hearing date say something like:

Each party must deliver to every other party and to the court office copies of all documents on which he intends to rely at the hearing no later than [ . . . ] [14 days before the hearing].

Allygood100

Yes you right it does just saw it. Thank you

Redx

Its Hello people, not what you have written


and your parking company is PARKING EYE, not Civil Enforcement

Allygood100

Sorry guys it was a typo.

Coupon-mad

Your exhibit numbering is odd, jumping from A1 to 'B' then A2?

And the draft WS doesn't match your defence, where I encouraged you to point out as a local cabby, that you pass and re-pass in and out of Hotel and other car parks on the same day very often, and put P/Eye to strict proof that this was one visit.

This is for them to prove, not you.

So don't just write 'I parked' like in your draft. Try this, plus the extra exhibits I suggest:

In the County Court at XXXXX

Claim No. XXXXXXXX

Between
ParkingEye Ltd (Claimant)
and
XXXXXXXXXX (Defendant)

---

Witness Statement

---

1. I am Xxxxxx, of [Address], [Postcode], the Defendant in this matter. I will say as follows:

2. I am a regular visitor to this Hotel site in question due to my job as a local cabby and on many occasions too numerous to recall, I pass and re-pass through the same site more than once a day. Whilst my working days are much the same and unremarkable, this may have been one such short duration multiple visit/parking and re-parking occasion. The Court is invited to note that this Claimant is notorious for the ANPR flaw noted by their Trade Body the British Parking Association in the article shown in Exhibit x * which says ''As with all new technology, there are issues associated with its use. [...] Repeat users of a car park inside a 24 hour period sometimes find that their first entry is paired with their last exit, resulting in an ‘overstay’. Operators are becoming aware of this and should now be checking all ANPR transactions to ensure that this does not occur.''

3. I can evidence that ParkingEye are the most commonly-documented private parking company to fall foul of ANPR flaws and it is my honest belief that they fail to undertake the checks they say they do. Not only are they the most common parking firm featured in an online article about ANPR not being fit for purpose on private land, which lists hundreds of 'double visit shown as one long visit' examples (see exhibit x) + but they were also the subject of a complaint to the Information Commissioner for this data processing failure (see exhibit x) ++.

4. ParkingEye are put to strict proof that this was not just such an occasion, and the burden lies with them to prove the case, with all images of cars between the first in/last out times my taxi was captured that day, whether or not my numberplate was captured more than once, or missed/obscured, which is what causes the all too common error they need to address with evidence.

5. I have previously received a private PCN wrongly alleging I was at a site for 15 hours when in fact it was two short pick-ups/drop-offs hours apart. So I have first hand experience, as do many cabbies, of this inherent and common flaw with ANPR systems, such that I am wary of ANPR camera enforced sites and would only park for any length of time with permission of the landowners or if visiting briefly to pick up and drop off passengers.

6. The allegation appears to be based on images by their ANPR camera at the entrance and exit to the site. This is merely an image of the vehicle in transit, entering and leaving the car park in question and is not evidence of the registered keeper 'not purchasing the appropriate parking time' or of the driver not being an authorised visitor of the Hotel (which I was).

7. I was never made aware of any new parking restrictions by the Hotel staff - despite visiting often and reporting to Reception for guests - nor was I made aware that (as I have found out too late) apparently there is a non-prominent system to input vehicle registration numbers (VRNs) into a hidden hotel lobby keypad. I would like to draw the court attention to the poor signage please see exhibit number (A1) and the Claimant is put to strict proof that a keypad was in Reception and in working order, at the material time.

8. In fact, visitors are granted exemption from parking charges whilst using the facilities. Evidence of this is contained in a confirmation letter provided by the Hotel, dated XXXXX, and attached as Exhibit B but no-one told me as a cabby that to claim exemption, I might need to input my VRN on every visit.

9. I suggest the lack of prominence of the hidden keypad is either as a result of negligence or a deliberate action by this Claimant and they cannot blame the Hotel staff, when the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 ('the POFA' - see exhibit x) burden for 'adequate notice', and a 'relevant obligation/contract' falls squarely with the parking firm trying to create a contract regarding a parking charge.

10. As well as failing to create adequate notice and a relevant obligation/contract - pre-requisites for parking on private land cases - the Claimant has fallen foul of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations (CPUTRs) in terms of a 'misleading omission' in allowing the keypad system to be so obscure as to be unknown even to a regular visitor like a local cabby.

11. I am not an unobservant person and argue that the average person would not have seen or known about the VRN system, therefore the contractual charge arising from not using it, is void under consumer unfair contracts law.

12. The Claimant is put to strict photographic evidential proof of the prominence of the system that day (not an assumption as to where the keypad actually was) and to declare to the court in evidence, how many parking charges they have issued at this site due purely to drivers not being given adequate notice/not entering their VRNs.

13. Upon receipt of a parking charge notice from the Claimant, I approached the hotel staff and spoke to the duty manager who agreed with me that parking charge should never have been issued to me and promised to get it cancelled. The Hotel Manager seemed to have dealt with many such complaints about over-zealous ANPR enforcement at this location and he was was helpful and reasonable and took my details.

14. I have an email from the Hotel Duty Manager - exhibit number xx - which says he requested ParkingEye to cancel the ticket and that I should expect their email to confirm it been cancelled. However, despite the Claimant knowing that this was the wish of their principal, the landowning Hotel, that did not happen.

15. I can evidence that ParkingEye knew about the Hotel's wishes because they wrote to me, vaguely mentioning that they had received 'new information' yet they did not offer to cancel the claim without charge, despite knowing that a lack of 'commercial justification' and 'legitimate interest' would completely distinguish this case from their flagship win in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67, and thus leave the penalty rule firmly engaged in this case. This 'parking charge' is damned by the Claimant's own Beavis case and is unrecoverable and inconscionable.

16. Due to the Hotel's promise that visitors are exempt from charges and the emailed promise to cancel their agent's charge, it is my position that, under the doctrine of promissory estoppel, the Claimant has no standing, or cause of action, to litigate in this matter remembering that they are at all times, agents of the Hotel.

17. It was always within the gift of the Claimant to exempt local cabbies, as they do for the Hotel staff, but they failed to make the Hotel aware that they could have permanently added certain additional (non-staff) VRNs to the site's ''white list''. This can include cabbies and disabled visitors and would avoid unfair PCNs entirely. Instead the Claimant puts an undue burden on the Hotel to point out the hidden keypad every time, even when busy, and to have to handle complaints one by one and email ParkingEye to cancel unfair PCNs on a case by case basis, which is unworkable for a busy Hotel and busy cabbies who are in and out every day. This is a system set up to fail.

18. Even if the Claimant shows their entire image records from that day (including vehicles who passed the cameras and did not have their full VRN visible, such as when being followed by a large sided vehicle or due to the angle of the camera) it is averred that I was authorised to visit this site without penalty in any case, and that the intention of the scheme was never to penalise taxi drivers.

19. This case has similarities with the Senior Circuit Judge's findings regarding the brief stop by Miss Jopson in another car park, in an Appeal case decided by His Honour Judge Harris QC at Oxford County Court, in case number B9GF0A9E: 'JOPSON V HOME GUARD SERVICES’ - see exhibit x **. Whilst that case was about a residential car park and unloading, the Judge took time to define 'parking' as leaving a vehicle for a period of time, as opposed to passing and re-passing and brief stopping for a short duration of vehicles as part of their right of access or for deliveries.

20. The Judge held at #20: ''Neither party was able to direct the court to any authority on the meaning of the word “park”. However, the Shorter Oxford Dictionary has the following: “To leave a vehicle in a carpark or other reserved space” and “To leave in a suitable place until required.” The concept of parking, as opposed to stopping, is that of leaving a car for some duration of time beyond that needed for getting in or out of it, loading or unloading it, and perhaps coping with some vicissitude of short duration, such as changing a wheel in the event of a puncture. Merely to stop a vehicle cannot be to park it; otherwise traffic jams would consist of lines of parked cars. Delivery vans, whether for post, newspapers, groceries, or anything else, would not be accommodated on an interpretation which included vehicles stopping for a few moments for these purposes. Discussion in this area left the respondent in obvious difficulties, from which the attractive advocacy of Miss Fenwick was unable to rescue it.''

21. And His Honour Judge Harris QC continued at #21: ''Whether a car is parked, or simply stopped, or left for a moment while unloading, or (to take an example discussed in argument) accompanying a frail person inside, must be a question of fact or degree. I think in the end this was agreed. A milkman leaving his float to carry bottles to the flat would not be “parked”. Nor would a postman delivering letters, a wine merchant delivering a case of wine, and nor, I am satisfied, a retailer’s van, or indeed the appellant, unloading an awkward piece of furniture. Any other approach would leave life in the block of flats close to unworkable...''

22. The job of a cabby arriving at a Hotel is on all fours with the above examples and the Jopson case is directly relevant to private parking cases, and is persuasive on the lower courts, with the Beavis case being fully distinguished, as held by HHJ Harris.

23. I invite the Court to dismiss this claim in its entirety, and to award my costs of attendance at the hearing, such as are allowable pursuant to CPR 27.14.

Statement of Truth

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


Signature


Date

+ http://notomob.co.uk/discussions/index.php?topic=5768.120


++ http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2015/10/parkingeye-subject-to-data-protection.html



* https://www.britishparking.co.uk/ANPR


**
http://nebula.wsimg.com/f6d657adf7df70d27e1dd285688b5701?AccessKeyId=4CB8F2392A09CF228A46&disposition=0&alloworigin=1

(Find that case here, in case that link is too long/broken):

http://www.parking-prankster.com/more-case-law.html

Allygood100

Recieved this today from the hotel manager after i requested for them to put more pressure on PE to cancel ticket.

I can confirm that there is 1 hour complimentary slot for drop off/ pick up.

Any guest who comes to use our Food and beverage facilities – we encourage them to register their vehicles at the terminals located at reception desk.

Any vehicle come to use our electric charging stations, also need to register at reception desk.

Gym is for our In-house guests only – no visitor is allowed.