Elms Legal - Excel Parking - Chorlton (Lost)

Piffpop

Ok thank you all for the input, I'm going ahead and submitting the defence. I will update again when I hear more.

Fruitcake

Did you send an SAR to Excel? If not, do so now using the information from the NEWBIES on how to do it.
If so, and it only contained two images of the car, complain to them that since this was a clear case of double dipping you require all four images showing the two separate entry and exit visits. Give them seven days to respond. If they don't them complain to the ICO.

Does anyone who was an occupant of the car at the time have a smart 'phone with location tracking enabled? If so, download the date as it will show the phone's passage through the car park at times that match your assertions and their ANPR scameras.

Does an occupant have work logs/work emails/colleague witness statements to say where that person was during the two times from the scameras?

Have you got pics of the site and signage to show the two entrances. Have you got a map showing the route the driver would take to get to and from their place of work?

Have you complained to your MP yet about this unregulated scam?

Have you identified the landowner yet by contacting the land registry? I believe you need to print a map of the area, outline the boundary on the hard copy, then scan and submit to the Land Registry along with address details or at least a post code. 

Piffpop

Fruitcake said:

Did you send an SAR to Excel? If not, do so now using the information from the NEWBIES on how to do it.
If so, and it only contained two images of the car, complain to them that since this was a clear case of double dipping you require all four images showing the two separate entry and exit visits. Give them seven days to respond. If they don't them complain to the ICO.

Does anyone who was an occupant of the car at the time have a smart 'phone with location tracking enabled? If so, download the date as it will show the phone's passage through the car park at times that match your assertions and their ANPR scameras.

Does an occupant have work logs/work emails/colleague witness statements to say where that person was during the two times from the scameras?

Have you got pics of the site and signage to show the two entrances. Have you got a map showing the route the driver would take to get to and from their place of work?

Have you complained to your MP yet about this unregulated scam?

Have you identified the landowner yet by contacting the land registry? I believe you need to print a map of the area, outline the boundary on the hard copy, then scan and submit to the Land Registry along with address details or at least a post code. 

Hi Fruitcake,
I've done the SAR, yes it only contained 2 images.
I've looked at old Google Maps tracking, it doesn't have the time going through the car park but it does show a journey at some point in the day from the workplace (I did various journeys sometimes).
I'm trying to get a letter from my previous employer but because 'they don't know if I was in' (high staff turnover with lack of HR at the time), I can ask other ex employees who I'm still in contact with but that's it really.
I can find the route no problem and I have pictures of signage, I can only date back on Google to show the signage hasn't change in years.
I haven't complained to the MP but I possibly could on a few cases with this car park and Excel.
I haven't identified the landowner through land registry but I have called, they just kept referring back to Excel.

Piffpop

Actually I'm going to be honest, I've read the defence on the template given wrong, on point 16, I'm not entirely sure what to put? You can't see any driver in the images but does the driver now admit they are the driver or not?

KeithP

Piffpop said:

 You can't see any driver in the images but does the driver now admit they are the driver or not?

Everyone knows that the driver was the driver.  

Are you suggesting that the Defendant admits to being the driver?
Why would they want to do that?

Piffpop

KeithP said:

Piffpop said:

 You can't see any driver in the images but does the driver now admit they are the driver or not?

Everyone knows that the driver was the driver.  

Are you suggesting that the Defendant admits to being the driver?
Why would they want to do that?

Haha it's more of how to word this, wouldn't want any slapped wrists.

D_P_Dance

Perhaps you should re read the newbies.

Piffpop

Just a general update, I've now received a letter confirming dates for my WS and documents to be in by 23/09, the claim is listed as 'paper disposal without hearing' on the 19/11. Again, to reaffirm, I will be heeding all advice on the newbies thread.

Umkomaas

the claim is listed as 'paper disposal without hearing' on the 19/11. Again, to reaffirm, I will be heeding all advice on the newbies thread.

Here's some immediate advice - do not agree to a hearing on the papers, the chances of losing are much, much higher that way. Since the greater use of the method we have only seen one successful case, but many more unsuccessful ones. 

Please read Coupon-mad's 'Telephone Hearings' thread which will explain in detail why you don't want to go down the 'papers' route, and how you should respond to the court to get this to a telephone hearing as a minimum, but ideally a face-to-face event. 

Coupon-mad

Piffpop said:

Just a general update, I've now received a letter confirming dates for my WS and documents to be in by 23/09, the claim is listed as 'paper disposal without hearing' on the 19/11. 

Obviously not OK.

You have objected and said ''no'' because you don't want to lose...of course. If you don't understand why a paper hearing is an ABSOLUTE NO-NO, then you aren't following our advice and have gone so far off piste that you risk losing.