Parking Eye - Set Aside | Ready?

FinesAreBad

Umkomaas wrote: »

Which part are you particularly thinking about including?

A lot of it is rant, the small claims court is not the place to unload that bluster.

PE were probably mentioned somewhere along the line in the Sir Greg Knight Bill, but they're more famous for their involvement in the Beavis case where The Supreme Court (the highest court in the land) supported their position, largely changing the face of private parking and why you're probably facing court proceedings right now.

You need to be focusing on legal issues that support your case.

I see, I have tried to keep the "rant" feeling to a minimum. I have taken your latest advice and have only briefly mentioned it in my Witness Statement. I agree, I think they have just got overly confident about what they can do to people without having any serious consequences for them. Even the cases they lose they make the money back from other victims. It's disgusting and it makes me sick.

I will post an updated version of my Witness Statement in a moment I hope to be able to put everything together properly so I can submit the form on Monday.

henrik777

Before worrying about a potential defence you'd be best finding out whether you're applying for a MANDATORY set aside (13.2) or or a DISCRETIONARY set aside (13.3).


So when was the "incident" ?

When did they contact DVLA ?

When did they initiate the claim ?

What did they do to find you ?

Having SAr'd and conversed with DVLA i expect you have the first 3 answers.

FinesAreBad

Here is an updated version of my Witness Statement, I've mostly added points as to why the claim should be struck out, point 3 onward.

WITNESS STATEMENT
IN THE COUNTY COURT AT: XX
CLAIM No: XX
BETWEEN:
PARKING EYE LIMITED (Claimant)
-- and --
XXX(Defendant)
______________________________________________
WITNESS STATEMENT
______________________________________________
Witness Statement Plan

1. Statement of Truth

1.1 My name is XXX, currently living at XXX and I am the Defendant in this case. All information given by me in this statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. In this N244 application I request that:

1.2 The Default Judgement issued against me on 12th of June 2018 is set-aside.

1.3 Costs are reserved

1.4 The Claimant serves a copy of the claim form on the Defendant within a limited timeframe or the claim is struck out and the fee for the application is reimbursed to the Defendant by the Claimant.

1.5 If the Claimant chooses to discontinue the Claim after the CCJ is set aside, the Claimant shall pay the Defendant's costs summarily assessed at £255 plus costs for attending the hearing.

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


 
2. Default Judgement

2.1 I found out I have a CCJ on me credit file in November 2018 while I was going through my credit report in preparation to get an estimate for a mortgage.

2.2 I contacted the court the following day in order to get more information about the CCJ, that’s when I learned that a company called Parking Eye Ltd has made a claim against me. The claimant was using an old address of mine and I never received any of their correspondence prior to them making the claim. The Claimant used the same address when filing the claim against me and I never received any of the court documents as well. Had I ever received any correspondence from the Claimant or the Court I would have definitely replied in an effort to reach an agreement. After I got in contact with the Court, I received a letter suggesting that I apply to have the CCJ set aside by filing an N244 form. I received this letter on the XX Evidence [E1]

2.3 I was very upset about the whole situation and I contacted my MP Sir XX on the XX for help. Evidence [E2] The MP got in touch with me and made a representation to the claimant on the XX[E3] this also included a consent form from myself to allow the MP to do so. [E4]

2.4 In his letter dated XX, Sir XX, requested that Parking Eye investigates the matter and suspends any recovery actions when done so.

2.5 We received a response from the Claimant on the XX, only then I became aware that their claim was about a Parking Charge Notice issued against me on XX at “The Range”. In their response Parking Eye deceitfully claimed that they have "no mechanism to do so via the courts" [E5] referring to Sir XX request to suspend any recovery actions. I then learned that the PCN was issued for overstaying 48 minutes at a car park of the retails shop “The Range” in X. The response did not however contain any other information, such as pictures of the signs in the car park or any copies of the issued PCN. Furthermore, the claimant clearly stated "We can confirm we will contact your constituent with a view to resolving the matter." [E5] To date I have not received a single letter from Parking Eye LTD except a response to a SAR.

2.6 I issued a SAR to Parking Eye on the XX and I received a response on the XX For me this was proof that they can indeed be prompt at replying when they are forced to do so by law. I then saw that they do not have any proof of me, the registered keeper of vehicle XX being in breach of any contract as they only had a photograph of my number plate. There were no photographs supplied of any signs on the car park therefore I could not have been in any contract and their claim has no basis. [E6]

2.7 As the Claimant suggested I did not keep my address up-to-date [E5] with the DVLA, I had already issued a SAR to the DVLA on the XX. [E7] The response from the DVLA was rather unsatisfactory [E8] and I could not get a hold of all the information I was looking for. I purchased my car on the XX and as required by law I put down my current address at the time XXX. I moved away from that address on the XX. I had arranged with my old landlord to get my post and I received my new logbook at the end of September. I then sent my new logbook back to the DVLA to get my address updated and waited for a about 6 weeks to hear back from them. I didn't receive anything, so I contacted the DVLA and it turned out they never received my logbook. I had to pay a fee to get my logbook reissued and I received my reissued logbook in December. I then sent the updated logbook back and my address was updated a couple of days after the bank holidays in the beginning of XX. Please see evidence [E12] [E13] also.

2.8 My MP then followed this up with the DVLA and we managed to get a hold of a bit more information. [E9] This was enough for me to be able to demonstrate that when the claimant requested my details from the DVLA my documents were already in the post. My address was update on XXa week after the claimant requested my details. [E9][10]

2.9 Given that the incident occurred around the bank holidays, I don't believe I can be held responsible for the timescales the DVLA works to. I believe I have put every effort to do everything I am required by law and keep my details up to date. After gathering all of this information I sent a letter to the Claimant several months later after the claimant promised to contact me with a view to resolve the matter. In my letter I explained to the claimant that everything was a big misunderstanding and I asked them to contact me so we can work out a solution. [E14]

2.10 The letter was sent through the MP and as they did not respond, the MP tried to contact the claimant again. He asked them for an update as to why they have not contacted me yet. The MP however received no response from the claimant. I waited for a total of XX months for a reply from the claimant. [E15]

2.11 I then wrote a final letter to the director of Parking Eye Mr. Phillip Neil BoynesXX on the XX, asking him to look into the matter. I also provided him with all the evidence, including the letter from the MP, Parking Eye's original response and my first letter to Parking Eye. In my final letter I asked for a written reply by the XX however I have still not received a single letter from the Claimant. [E16]

2.12 I have spent nearly a year trying to contact the claimant in order to resolve this matter. They have completely ignored any letters from me and a member of parliament, Sir XX. This is why I consider the claimant to have behaved unreasonably.

2.13 To date, the claimant has still not contacted me.

2.14 Based on the above, I request that the CCJ be set aside. I have been denied a fair trial and a chance to properly defend my case. I have done everything to the best of my knowledge to get in touch with the claimant. The Claimant has not only ignored my attempts to contact them, but has also ignored direct correspondence from a member of parliament, Sir XX. Furthermore, I believe I have a real prospect of defending my case, based on the details outlined below.
 
3. Order dismissal of the claim

3.1 I am aware that the claim against me is for overstaying in a car park where allegedly there is signage that limits parking up to 2 hours. However, no details of the wording on the signs at the time has been provided to me. Therefore, I deny any liability and I deny that I am in breach of any contract with the claimant as I could not have entered into a contract or an agreement with them whatsoever.

3.2 The driver of the vehicle to which I am the registered keeper was a legitimate customer at The Range. The driver purchased 38 different glassware items to a total of XX and was held at the tills as staff tried to find something to wrap each and every item in. A staff member then helped the driver load all the items into the car. [E17]

3.3 The claimant has not provided any proof that they are authorised to act in the name of the merchant, that is The Range. Even if they are, in this case no damages can be claimed as none have occurred. The driver was a legitimate customer and spend XX in store.

3.4 Parking Eye Ltd have been contacted on multiple occasions by the member of parliament Sir XX and have failed to respond to him.

3.5 The claimant has also avoided direct correspondence from the defendant. They have chosen not to respond to any direct communications from myself, thus leaving me with no choice, but to defend my case on all fronts.

3.6 The above confirms that it’s a deliberate attempt by the Claimant to abuse the CCJ system by adhering to unreasonable malpractices. This has caused undue hardships for the Defendant, whose credit rating have been debunked to near useless values, thus severely crippling him in his daily life.

3.7 CPR 27.14 (2) States that “The court may not order a party to pay a sum to another party in respect of that other party’s costs, fees and expenses, including those relating to an appeal, except –”

3.8 CPR27.14 (2)(c) “any court fees paid by that other party;”

3.9 CPR27 14 (2)(e) “a sum not exceeding the amount specified in Practice Direction 27 for any loss of earnings or loss of leave by a party or witness due to attending a hearing or to staying away from home for the purposes of attending a hearing;”

3.10 CPR27 14 (2)(g) “such further costs as the court may assess by the summary procedure and order to be paid by a party who has behaved unreasonably; “

3.11 Webb Resolutions Ltd v Waller Needham & Green [2012] EWHC 3529 (Ch);
Successful Claimant failed to recover costs and ordered to pay Defendant’s. Judgment reiterated that the aim of the pre-action requirements was to enable an early exchange of information so that a potential claim could be fully investigated and, if possible, resolved without the need for costly litigation. It clearly demonstrates that litigation should be a last resort, not pursued as a matter of course as Parking Eye Ltd has done in this case.

3.12 I submit to the court that the Claimant has also breached the Pre-action Practice Direction

3.13 Paras 3, 8 and 12 of the PD set out its purpose, which is to primarily to avoid litigation (para 8) by laying down a procedure which allows the parties to:
- understand each other’s positions (para 3)
- make decisions about how to proceed (para 3)
- explore settlement/consider ADR (para 3)
- support the “efficient management” of any proceedings and reduce costs (para 3)
- “stocktake” and review their respective positions after following the PD by exchanging information, to see if proceedings can be avoided and to “at least” narrow the issues (para 12).


3.14 Paras 6(a) & (c) oblige a Claimant to enter into a meaningful dialogue with a Defendant at an early stage by imposing specific obligations to:
- explain the claim in a Letter Before Claim,
- provide relevant core documents, and
- answer any questions asked by the Defendant in sufficient detail for the Defendant to understand and respond


3.15 No such options were provided to me by the Claimant due their continued posting of communication to the old address. I further submit to the court that the Claimant continued to ignore direct letters from me and a member of parliament and never provided an opportunity for rightful communication and thus denied opportunities to avoid litigation.


3.16 Claimant’s conduct has denied Defendant the opportunities under 2.1-5: no pre-action dialogue at all. In fact, until I myself had pursued the Credit Agencies to identify the CCJ on me, I had no idea of the cause of action being pursued for or the evidence being relied upon, which resulted in me having to defend the Claim on all fronts.


3.17 Had the Claimant complied, I could have raised some or all of my other points now raised in my witness statement and issues before the court today could have been disposed of or narrowed.


3.18 Para 13-16 sanctions: compliance with the PD is not voluntary, nor is it a “guide” to best practice. It is part of the CPR and is binding. Parties are expected to comply with it. The court may punish those who do not. Inter alia, the court’s powers include a costs order, and this may be on the indemnity basis (16(a) and (b)) and the power to remit (or increase) interest 16(c)/(d). Such sanctions can apply even against a successful party (paragraph 16).


3.19 The PD’s aim is to create an opportunity to resolve matters (or at least narrow issues) in the “lower cost atmosphere of pre-action protocol procedure”, rather than the “higher cost atmosphere of court proceedings” (as it was referred to in Charles Church Developments Ltd v Stent Foundations Limited & Peter Dann Limited [2007] EWHC 855).

3.20 Parking Eye Ltd had a reasonable doubt to believe my details are incorrect as I did not reply to any of their letters or to any of the court papers. As a parking company which specializes in issuing PCNs daily the Claimant has certainly been in this situation before and has had a good reason to believe they did not have my correct details. Yet they proceeded with the court claim.

3.21 I submit to the court that the Claimant cannot produce evidence of the alleged contract at the carpark at The Range on the date of the event XX.

3.22 It is noted that such unreasonable behaviour of Parking companies, Government in their right mindset have announced a CCJ review due to parking companies exploiting the legal system in December 2016. The Right Honourable Sir Oliver Heald QC MP on 23 December 2016 "announced a crackdown on unresolved debts which can damage people’s credit ratings without them knowing. The action comes after concerns were raised that companies were issuing claims to consumers using incorrect addresses." The Minister added

"It cannot be right that people who are unaware of debts can see their lives and finances ruined by county court judgments. That in the digital age, we must ensure companies pursuing unpaid debts make every reasonable effort to contact individuals, rather than simply relying on a letter to an old address.”

3.23 I note that parliament has been well aware of the Method of Operation (MO) of such private parking companies, and on the 15th of March 2019 a Bill was enacted to limit the damage they cause to normal people’s life.


Based on the details in this witness statement I will ask the court to set-aside the County Court Judgement with reference XX issued on XX. I will also ask the court that the Claimant pays the Defendant costs for the N244 application and for attending the hearing. I will also ask the court to strike out the original claim. All information in this Witness statement is true to the best of my knowledge.

FinesAreBad

henrik777 wrote: »

Before worrying about a potential defence you'd be best finding out whether you're applying for a MANDATORY set aside (13.2) or or a DISCRETIONARY set aside (13.3).


So when was the "incident" ?

When did they contact DVLA ?

When did they initiate the claim ?

What did they do to find you ?

Having SAr'd and conversed with DVLA i expect you have the first 3 answers.

Hello,

I will definately be applying for a DISCRETIONARY set aside (13.3)

So when was the "incident" ?
- The even was in end of December 2017

When did they contact DVLA ?
- 3 days later on the last day of December

When did they initiate the claim ?
- Middle of February 2018

What did they do to find you ?
- Nothing but the minimum. They only requested my details from the DVLA in the beginning. They have only issued the original PCN then a NTK and then they went straight for a claim.

FinesAreBad

Well, I've done my final touches and will be heading to the court tomorrow. Where it says have you "enclosed the correct fee" does that mean they want me to write them a check? Can I pay at reception in the court? Should I take cash with me?

Coupon-mad

Any of the above. I expect the court take card payments if you are not eligible for help with fees on income grounds.

FinesAreBad

The wheel has been turned, now just have to wait. I was a bit confused because I was looking for a sign that reads reception, but instead they had "Public Counter" which everyone calls reception anyway :rotfl:

They are going to transfer the claim from a diffrent court and I got them to write me a notice I handed in the form.

How long should I wait for a response before I give them a call? Thats the only thing I forgot to ask, cheers!

Coupon-mad

At your hearing, when the Judge asks your reasons for set aside, DO NOT SAY THIS:

My reason for applying for the set aside is because I don't want the CCJ on my credit file. I am looking to apply for a mortgage next year and I want my credit file rid of this nonsense.

This is NOT a reason to grant a set aside, to ''cleanse your credit rating'', so no saying that at all, steer right away from it.

Your reason is that the claim was not properly served (because...blah blah...) and that you wish to defend the unfair parking charge and have good prospects of success because...

FinesAreBad

Coupon-mad wrote: »

At your hearing, when the Judge asks your reasons for set aside, DO NOT SAY THIS:
This is NOT a reason to grant a set aside, to ''cleanse your credit rating'', so no saying that at all, steer right away from it.

Your reason is that the claim was not properly served (because...blah blah...) and that you wish to defend the unfair parking charge and have good prospects of success because...

Hi,

I would never base my defence on that, its more of a plead than a defence if I did. I have plenty of other reasons why the CCJ should be set-aside.

I received a letter today from court that :j I will have a hearing :j The letter is dated 17th of September and I only received it today so 3 days have been lost. This should be plenty to prepare a defence right? The hearing is on the 3rd of October.

1. Do I actually have to submit a defence for the hearing for a set-aside? - Do I defend the original claim in this defence?
2. Does the defence to have the CCJ set aside vary from a defence against the claim? - My understanding is the hearing is ONLY for the set-aside and that is where the judge will agree to set-aside the judgement and if the judgement is set-aside a new hearing will take place where I will have to submit a new defence against the original claim.
2. Do I have to submit a skeleton argument?
3. Do I have to submit a schedule of costs now?

I've read through a lot of similar threads, but I am still a bit confused and I want to make sure I'm doing it right.

Coupon-mad

1. Do I actually have to submit a defence for the hearing for a set-aside? - Do I defend the original claim in this defence? No.

2. Does the defence to have the CCJ set aside vary from a defence against the claim? Yes.

My understanding is the hearing is ONLY for the set-aside and that is where the judge will agree to set-aside the judgement and if the judgement is set-aside a new hearing will take place where I will have to submit a new defence against the original claim.
Yes, correct.

2. Do I have to submit a skeleton argument? No.

3. Do I have to submit a schedule of costs now? No, but be absolutely clear on the day that you would like the Judge to order that your costs are refunded by the Claimant due to their conduct in failing to properly serve the claim, or in the alternative, that costs are noted on his/her order to be 'reserved' to the main hearing of the case, because you have good prospects of successfully defending it and will wish to ask for your costs back, under the circumstances.