Advice needed - County Court claim, UK Parking Control Ltd

venousdata

I wrote to my local MP and I will be including his response in my evidence, despite him stating he was unable to cancel the charges after contacting UKPC.

I am more confused by the need for a supplementary WS for £60 fake charges when I’ve mentioned it in my initial defence document which has already been submitted?
Is coupon-mad trying to say that I should exclude that part for now until I see the claimants WS and then submit it as a supplementary WS after?

venousdata

hi again,



i've put together a section about double recovery by chopping bits out of my initial defence and reducing their length to enable it to fit my story a bit better (it was starting to look like another defence document)


any feedback would be appreciated!


[FONT=&quot]8. The claimant is arguing that I entered into a formal contract by stopping my vehicle to load/unload my luggage. By doing so I would be liable to pay a parking charge. I do not agree with this. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Firstly, signs were not clearly visible and not displayed prominently. I was unaware of any restrictions being in place, therefore not aware of any offers of contract.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The BPA Code of Practice gives clear instructions as to the placing, visibility and clarity of any signs that are used to form contracts. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]It says in section 18.3: ‘You must place signs containing the specific parking terms throughout the site, so that drivers are given the chance to read them at the time of parking or leaving their vehicle.’ in addition to explaining that ‘signs must be conspicuous and legible, and written in intelligible language, so that they are easy to see, read and understand.’.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]As shown in the photographs submitted as evidence, the signs are not visible from within a vehicle, barely legible standing right in front of them, and not even visible in the photograph of my car in each notice. COLOR=red]REFER EVIDENCE HERE[/COLOR[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Secondly, I was not parked - I had only stopped to load/unload shopping or luggage, which at times was heavy and awkward to carry. There are no designated loading bays at the block of apartments, and no other method of transporting items to and from the apartment. It would be impossible to live in the apartment block if you are fined for simply loading or unloading personal possessions. Penalising residents for such actions are unfair business practices, contrary to the doctrine of good faith and case law, Jopson v Home Guard which highlights this very issue. COLOR=red]REFER EVIDENCE HERE[/COLOR[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Thirdly the signage is of a forbidding nature and therefore fails to form a contract. In the cases of B4GF26K6 PCM (UK) v Mr B, B4GF27K3 PCM (UK) v Mr W and B4GF26K2 PCM (UK) v Ms L [/FONT][FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]COLOR=red]REFER EVIDENCE HERE[/COLOR[/FONT] it was demonstrated that forbidding signage at residential parking spaces did not create a contract. The signs erected on site are incapable of forming the basis of a contract and indeed make it clear that that is not the case. Further it is trite law that a term that is forbidding cannot also constitute an offer. It is therefore denied that any contract was formed or was capable of being formed.
[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]9. The claimant is claiming £160 for each charge, where the maximum allowed, according to the PoFA, at Section 4(5) is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper (£100), in this case for [redacted] PCNs, a maximum of [redacted] depending on the Claimant’s full compliance with the PoFA and establishing a beach of a ‘relevant obligation’ and/or ‘relevant contract’. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]In a very recent case (F0DP201T) [/FONT][FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]COLOR=red]REFER EVIDENCE HERE[/COLOR[/FONT], District Judge Taylor, dismissed a case from BWLegal that included a false amount of £60 added to a £100 parking charge, identical to that of the Claimant’s charges. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]In addition to this, another case (Ladak v DRC Locums UKEAT/0488/13/LA) [/FONT][FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]COLOR=red]REFER EVIDENCE HERE[/COLOR[/FONT], explains that the claimant is only entitled to recover the direct and provable costs of the time spent on preparing the claim in a legal capacity, and not any administration costs allegedly incurred by already remunerated clerical staff working for SCS Law in issuing automated claims.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Furthermore, it was held in the Supreme Court in Beavis [/FONT][FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]COLOR=red]REFER EVIDENCE HERE[/COLOR[/FONT] (where £85 was claimed, and no more) that a private parking charge already includes a very significant and high percentage in profit and more than covers the costs of running an automated regime of template letters. It is also a fact that debt collection agencies act on a no-win-no-fee basis for parking operators, so no such costs have been incurred in truth. Thus, there can be no ‘damages/costs’ to pile on top of any parking charge claim, and the Defendant asks that the Court takes judicial notice of this repeated abuse of consumers rights and remedies, caused by parking firms artificially inflating their robo-claims.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Another judgment in which the judge strikes out a parking claim out for repeatedly adding sums they are not entitled to recover. In the Caernarfon Court in Case number FTQZ4W28 (Vehicle Control Services Ltd v Davies) [/FONT][FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]COLOR=red]REFER EVIDENCE HERE[/COLOR[/FONT], District Judge Jones-Evans stated that their claim for £60 on each charge is ‘unenforceable in law and is an abuse of process’.[/FONT]

Coupon-mad

venousdata wrote: »

I am more confused by the need for a supplementary WS for £60 fake charges when I’ve mentioned it in my initial defence document which has already been submitted?
Is coupon-mad trying to say that I should exclude that part for now until I see the claimants WS and then submit it as a supplementary WS after?

No, we want to put this in the face of Judges. It needs to be raised and not just buried in defence. It is possible that some Judges might even strike a case out and vacate a hearing if they take the same view as DJ Grand did. He vacated some hearings after the 11th November one.

So include a supplementary WS using the full wording from post #14 of the Abuse of Process thread - should only be a page or two and as it's a separate sheet, it doesn't make your own WS any longer really, except one line to refer to it.

You don't have to print off and file/serve statute laws in advance, or the Beavis case, so you can save on printing the actual laws out, for now at least. If the hearing goes ahead then you'd take 3 copies of the 3 laws/case law that kill the £60 and you'd be ready to hand them out, to show the false £60 is an abuse of process.

venousdata

Thanks for the detailed response! Makes a lot more sense now. I’ll separate the double recovery but it in to a separate document, using the mentioned wording.

Sorry if this is a silly question, but up until now I was unaware of what a supplementary WS was:

Will this be referred to in my WS (e.g given an exhibit #) and treated like a piece of evidence? Or will it be submitted after I receive the claimants WS?

simone82

Good afternoon, I am in a similar situation and have my own thread, I have tried to search for the Ring binder thread by Coupon-mad but can't find it?

Le_Kirk wrote: »

Search the forum for posts by User Coupon-mad using the keyword(s) Ring Binder where she explains how to present the WS and the evidence. This is for the court only, you can e-mail (if permitted) to the claimant.

Coupon-mad

There are hundreds. You just need to put ring binder into 'search this forum' and change the advance search to SHOW RESULTS AS POSTS.

Sorry if this is a silly question, but up until now I was unaware of what a supplementary WS was:

Will this be referred to in my WS (e.g given an exhibit #) and treated like a piece of evidence? Or will it be submitted after I receive the claimants WS?

Answered less than an hour ago:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/76709266#Comment_76709266

venousdata

hey, i've finished my supplementary witness statement for the false £60 charge. I've noticed that you mentioned to print out two orders and bring them as evidence for the supplementary statement.


can a supplementary witness statement have its own evidence?



for example, my supplementary witness statement is a piece of evidence for my main witness statement, then those two orders are pieces of 'sub-evidence' for my witness statement. is that correct?


or... can i use any evidence so long as it's declared and relevant, regardless of whether i mention it in my witness statement?


e.g. a photo of a letter i sent SCS warning them of their double recovery attempt or multiple photos of the related car park.


i guess as i have a lot of evidence i didnt want to bloat my witness statement with countless references. sorry in advance if this question is a bit confusing!

Coupon-mad

my supplementary witness statement is a piece of evidence for my main witness statement, then those two orders are pieces of 'sub-evidence' for my witness statement. is that correct?

Yes.

can i use any evidence so long as it's declared and relevant, regardless of whether i mention it in my witness statement?

Yes you can use any evidence but you should add a one liner to your main narrative WS, referencing it.

venousdata

hi all,


i think i am finished with my witness statement and supplementary witness statement and am going to make a start on printing out my evidence and ordering it for the ringbinder.


i get the feeling that i am missing something out in my witness statement though..


so far my witness statement covers the following:

• authorisation to park
• poor signage
• primacy of contract
• false £60 charge (supplementary WS and lots of case transcript evience)
• loading/unloading evidence
• forbidding nature signs failing to form a valid contract
• no landowner authority (2 bits of evidence showing email from landowners denying existence of a ukpc contract)
• no proof of driver

thanks in advance!

venousdata

Bumping Incase previous comment wasn’t seen.

Also, has anyone experienced EDMONTON county court, London? Google reviews paint a very grim picture.