Parking Eye Court Claim - Defence help - deadline 25 July to submit - cannot find similar on forum

Kvotheraven

Hello everyone,

Firstly, thank you so much for this forum - it has already been invaluable and put my mind at ease a little. I have searched the forums as suggested and cannot find a similar case to mine - so I would really welcome help with my defence. Below are the details (as brief as I can be):

I have been issued with a Court Claim from Parking Eye and have sent my acknowledgement of service online.

I now have until 25 July to send my defence to the court. Please find below the details of my case:

• I was parked at The Range car park in Watford (run by Parking Eye). The limit for parking is two hours (I was unaware of this but I am aware this is no defence). I parked for over four hours.
  
• I shopped in The Range (and have a credit card payment of £4.59), with my baby daughter, and then met my friend at the cafe where we ate lunch (he paid for this). We also left the store to walk around for half an hour, and then returned again for coffee.
  
• The main reason for the time: my friend (a teacher) was going through a terrible time - and had been signed off work with anxiety and depression. He opened up to me for the first time and we talked for a really long time. He has since left his teaching post because of this. Time completely got away from me, and I didn't want to stop him from talking as we sat in the cafe (which is upstairs in the store - in a relatively discreet place).
  
• In that time I also had to change my baby daughter, and walk her around the store (to get her back off to sleep).
  
• I left completely unaware I had violated the parking time. Once I became aware (after the first notice letter) I went to the store directly to complain, but they offered no help and did not advise any course of action.

I wrongly took my wife's advice to "ignore" the original charge notices. Again, this is completely my fault, as I see how much things have changed recently. The court claim form came as a real shock.

Can anyone help me? I would be prepared to pay a small amount (maybe £10/15) as it was my mistake, but if I were to park at a pay and display car park in the area for five hours - the most I would pay is £5.10. I feel the sum I am being asked to pay (£60, then £100, now £175 including court fees) is extortionate in the extreme.

I was genuinely in the store, shopping, and then helping a good friend deal with an awful situation. I also had a small child with me (which always makes everything take longer!).

I am a bit overwhelmed with how to prepare a defence in this situation (do I even have one?). I would be so, so grateful for any advice as to what I should do. I am happy to give any more details if needed.

Thank you so much,

Simon

KeithP

What is the Issue Date on your Claim Form?

Kvotheraven

Hi Keith,
The issue date is 24 June.

KeithP

Anon wrote: »

Hi Keith,
The issue date is 24 June.

With a Claim Issue Date of 24th June, you had until Monday 15th July to do the Acknowledgement of Service. That was yesterday.
I'll assume you did the Acknowledgement of Service before then. Please confirm.

You have a few more days than you thought.

With a Claim Issue Date of 24th June, and having done the Acknowledgement of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 29th July 2019 to file your Defence.

That's nearly two weeks away. Loads of time to produce a good Defence, but please don't leave it to the last minute.


When you are happy with the content, your Defence should be filed via email as suggested here:

Print your Defence.
1. Sign it and date it.
   
2. Scan the signed document back in and save it as a pdf.
   
3. Send that pdf as an email attachment to CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk
   
4. Just put the claim number and the word Defence in the email title, and in the body of the email something like 'Please find my Defence attached'.
   
5. Log into MCOL after a few days to see if the Claim is marked "defence received". If not chase the CCBC until it is.
   
6. Do not be surprised to receive an early copy of the Claimant's Directions Questionnaire, they are just trying to keep you under pressure.
   
7. Wait for your DQ from the CCBC, or download one from the internet, and then re-read post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread to find out exactly what to do with it.

KeithP

Also, if you have based your forum username on you real name you are best advised to get it changed to something much more anonymous.

To help with that, you might like to read this short extract from The MSE Forum Guide - Frequently Asked Questions & Rules:

Q. How can I change my username?

A. In most circumstances, this is not permitted.

The only reason we will change your username is if it puts your privacy at risk. This usually means you've inadvertently registered using your name, email address or something that gives away your identity within your username.

If you fall into this category, email forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com and request that it is changed, giving three alternative usernames in order of preference.

Kvotheraven

Yes, I did the AOS on 4 July. That's great to know I have a bit longer to get my defence ready. I'm just a little stuck as to what to include and how to word it.

Thank you for taking the time to follow-up on this.

Coupon-mad

I feel the sum I am being asked to pay (£60, then £100, now £175 including court fees) is extortionate in the extreme.

That is exactly what NOT to say, as your case is uncomfortably like ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67, which the scumbags managed to win in the Supreme Court, and that dreadful decision stamps all over any such argument about 'extortionate costs in a free retail car park'. You MUST 'distinguish' your case from Beavis or you are doomed.

AIUI, the main way for you to differentiate your case from Beavis is to cite the Equality Act 2010 and say you were with a person with severe and long term mental health anxiety, a debilitating condition which caused the trip to take longer by virtue of the symptoms at the time, from his condition. Severe ongoing/repeating anxiety meets the definition of disability within the Equality Act 2010 and service providers are required to allow reasonable adjustments for people and carers of people with such 'protected characteristics'. Indeed it has recently been confirmed that people with mental health conditions, not just mobility problems, will be entitled to Blue Badges if they qualify due to their specific needs (not that Blue Badges have any application on private land and nor can they be policed or abused by private parking firms as the only indicator of need).

A company cannot justify an arbitrary time limit that causes detriment to disabled people and nor can they be lawfully heard to say that they 'did not know' about the medical condition of your friend because the Act sets out illegal conduct which includes a concept called 'indirect discrimination' for which there is no such 'we didn't know' lawful excuse.

Attach a copy of some pages from the EHRC Equality Act Code of Practice, which you need to know is in itself, part of the law (not just guidance like any other CoP) and all private service providers have a legal duty to adhere to it and must make anticipatory adjustments of fixed policies in advance, for the protected population and carers 'at large'.

Say you believe no adjustment was made nor any risk assessment to take the needs of people with protected characteristics (and their carers) into account, before any enforcement started, at the time of starting or renewing the contract with the landowner. Put them to strict proof that they have allowed more time then able bodied/unprotected people would need (they haven't).

As well as the EA section about INDIRECT discrimination, you need the EHRC CoP section on 'tours' which is the relevant example in the Act and CoP which shows that the law applies just as much to inflexible arbitrary time limits as it does to physical adjustments at any consumer-facing location.

You need to make it clear this is VERY different from the ParkingEye v Beavis & Wardley case, where in the earlier hearings there was a second defendant, Mr Wardley, who had an injury and it was discussed whether he met the definition of disability but he did not as his issue was very much temporary. This is fundamental to consider and was also mentioned briefly in the final decision in Beavis, where at 107 their Lordships remarked about the fact-specific and complex case under discussion: ''In our opinion the term imposing the £85 charge was not unfair. The term does not exclude any right which the consumer may be said to enjoy under the general law or by statute.''

You should say that in your case, the unfair charge was not 'agreed' and did exclude your companion's rights under the E/Act statute and because you were his confidante and carer that day, your rights were restricted illegally, by way of indirect discrimination. Whether ParkingEye knew about him/his needs, or not, is immaterial in law and the E/Act states that any attempt to restrict consumer rights under the Act, render that term unenforceable.

The_Deep

Write bad stuff on the store's website, Facebook page and Twitter, accuse them of discriminating against disability, write to disability forum, and, most importantly, enlist the help of your MP.

Nine times out of ten these tickets are scams so complain to your MP.

Parliament is well aware of the MO of these private parking companies, and on 15th March 2019 a Bill was enacted to curb the excesses of these shysters. Codes of Practice are being drawn up, an independent appeals service will be set up, and access to the DVLA's date base more rigorously policed, persistent offenders denied access to the DVLA database and unable to operate.

Hopefully life will become impossible for the worst of these scammers, but until this is done you should still complain to your MP, citing the new legislation.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/enacted

Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these Private Parking Companies.

Redx

As mentioned above the Barry Beavis case stomps all over your extortionate argument and has done for 2 or 3 years so there is no chance of winning with arguments like you have mentioned (even though we agree with you)

So do not take criticism of your arguments personally, judges have already ruled it out 3 times against Beavis so it's not something that you can argue successfully as decisions have already been made

Therefore you need a new tack as CM says

There are several similar overstay cases on here in similar circumstances apart from your friend and their issues, so similar facts as regards maximum stays and not seeing signs etc, possibly at the range or similar retailers, so maybe read some of those ?

here is a similar overstay and not reading signs case, but for Home Bargains and PE

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5981065/county-court-claim-from-parking-eye-ltd-home-bargains&page=5

most of the legal arguments remain relevant, but not necessarily the background story, which may or may not matter


there are plenty more PE overstay cases where the basic core facts remain the issue, certainly not any alleged "loss" or not , or any alleged "excessive charges"

Kvotheraven

Thank you so much for all this help folks. I will try and draft something once I am done with my run of shifts (I am on late/overnight shifts until Monday now) and would welcome feedback on it.

If anyone has any further advice for my defence options that would be great. Thank you.

Kvotheraven

Hello again everyone.

I am finishing up a draft of my defence (with the idea of posting it registered on Thursday 25 July). Before I post that here for your advice - I had a question:

Would it be worth me getting a witness statement from my friend? Or can I mention this in the DQ and include his statement on the day?

Thank you