Eurocarparks CST law LBA SAR no response

SayNoToPCN

You asked: Will this have any bearing on the original case? 
The answer is no, becuase their solicitors breach of the DPA does not, in anyway shape or form, provide a defence brouhgt by the solicitors client for an entirely unrelated matter

Law isnt zero sum, entirely possible for you to be liable for the oreiginal claim, AND for the solicitors to be liable for a DPA breach. Same as two people crashing their cars into each other can boith be guilty of road traffic offences. 

judrop500

Here are the documents pertaining to the land use. Do you need the original PCNS and ANPR images as well?

Castle

Euro Car Parks will still need a contract with ECP (Holdings) PLC in order to manage the car park.

judrop500

Castle said:

Euro Car Parks will still need a contract with ECP (Holdings) PLC in order to manage the car park.

And planning permission for the signs and the ANPR I assume?

KeithP

judrop500 said:

Castle said:

Euro Car Parks will still need a contract with ECP (Holdings) PLC in order to manage the car park.

And planning permission for the signs and the ANPR I assume?

Yes that's true too, but we've yet to see a County Court interested in that aspect.

Coupon-mad

''37.  We would submit that the CRA 2015 are not applicable in parking cases...''

Hahahahahaha!!!!!!!  Hilarious.   

The single consumer law that talks about fairness and transparency in a consumer contract, isn't applicable to THIS consumer contract...why's that then, Mr/Mrs Claimant's legal rep who turns up on the hearing phone call?!  Explain that one!  

judrop500

Crib sheet as follows - have I missed anything? Hearing is in two weeks. Thanks again for all your help.

CONTESTED POINT	DOCUMENT REFERENCE
The signage was unclear and the division of land between ECP and Si Parking was also unclear, meaning that it’s impossible to know whose parking space belongs to which company.	·         Witness Statement paragraph 5-11 and images xx 1.1-2.0). ·         Exhibit xx 3.1.
I do not believe the Claimant has landowner authority to sue employees of the business. Furthermore ECP has not sought planning permission for the land use or displayed signage.	·         Claimant’s evidence does not support a contract between Euro Car Parks and ECP (Holdings) PLC.
The witness xxxx xxxx appears not to exist and I do not believe will be here to be questioned	·         Is xxxx xxxx present? ·         Claimant Supplementary Witness statement - Statement of Truth proves that this wasn’t written or witnessed by xxxx xxxx and only approved by her.
ECP has added fees that breach the CRA, POFA and Supreme court case law.	·         Witness Statement paragraphs 17-22 ·         Exhibit xx 4.1 ·         Exhibit xx 5.1
The Claimant has failed to provide adequate terms of the parking contract.	·       Witness Statement paragraphs 23-34.
Despite being told on two occasions of my change of address from 10 November 2020, the Claimant submitted their Witness statement to my previous address, breaching data protection regulations.	·         Statement dated xx April 2021 sent to my previous address. ·         Particulars of Claim dated xx January 2021 sent to my previous address.

judrop500

Also - what is my best and worst case scenario, in terms of outcome rom the hearing?

D_P_Dance

good result

https://www.rollonfriday.com/news-content/qc-victorious-court-over-ps85-parking-ticket

Bad result

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/787487/Driver-fined-thousands-parking-outside-parent-home-private-company-Scotland

Coupon-mad

Crib sheet looks OK to me if that's your main points, very well organised.

Worst case would be you lose and the Judge tells you to pay, but you should be able to get the sum reduced by the false added 'costs' that they never paid to anyone.