Advice re blue badge owner

KeithP

By filing an Acknowledgment of Service earlier than I suggested, you have reduced the time available to you to file a Defence.

Please disregard the Defence filing deadline I gave you earlier.

Instead, you have until 4pm on Monday 20th December 2021 to file your Defence.

[Deleted User]

KeithP said:

By filing an Acknowledgment of Service earlier than I suggested, you have reduced the time available to you to file a Defence.

Please disregard the Defence filing deadline I gave you earlier.

Instead, you have until 4pm on Monday 20th December 2021 to file your Defence.

Ok thank you.

[Deleted User]

Coupon-mad said:

I think I'd say they are trying to charge a disabled person for the few minutes it took to drive in and later to leave, which is in fact exempt time, the separate 'consideration' period and the 'grace' period.  Whilst the IPC CoP goes some way to state these are two periods, it is vague and fails to mention the time needed for a disabled person at the start and end of parking, which may be longer.

All of this is properly set out in the draft statutory Code based on BSI PAS232, the details of which have been released twice for public consultation and whose enactment is imminent.  In the draft statutory Code which will replace the two self-serving trade body versions, it is clear that the intention is that an average driver is allowed exempt time at the start and time at the end of parking, and disabled persons are allowed more time.

The contract you paid for was the one that applied to vehicles parking before 6pm, which offered parking at £x per hour, that you paid in good faith..

You are not bound by any term that only applied to vehicles entering and reading the terms after 6pm and it seems the system is set up to entrap unsuspecting drivers by taking their money but printing a ticket that, in the small print, reneges on the parking hours offered on the sign.

Hi. Thanks for the reoly. I agree completely that it's a setup/trap.

What does "you are not bound my any term that only applied to vehicles entering"? Does this mean that an hour's payment is good for an hour, even if contract terms change part way into the time? Eg that I should have from 17:55-18:55 even though the ticket expired at 18:00?

Do I should have 5 minutes "consideration" time, an hour's parking and then 10 minutes "grace period"?

Meaning that the 16 minute claimed overstay is actually only one minute that hasn't been "paid" for, before reasonable adjustments for a disabled person enter the frame?

Coupon-mad

Yes the contract can only be formed at the point your actions concluded it, and if you parked before six then you were reasonably entitled to read the terms relating to the actual time of entry and reading the terms.

No-one would pay an hourly fee only to get a ticket where the small print gave them an expiry time in 2 minutes.  Sufficient prominence must be given to terms that can act disadvantageously for consumers and the Supreme court said in the authority of ParkingEye v Beavis, that a parking contract must be clear and unambiguous, concealing no hidden 'pitfall or trap'.

[Deleted User]

HotelUniform74 said:

Hello again.

I want to include some additional text in my defence based on the below:

1. my ticket was bought at 17:55 for an hour, costing 70p. The ticket says it expired at 18:00. The signage says 70p an hour from 08:00 til 18:00, then £2 flat rate from 18:00 til 08:00.

2. The communication I received from PPS (claimant) in reply to my appeal (December 2019) says that I overstayed by 16 minutes, having entered the car park at 17:55 and exited the car park at 19:07 the same day. They also state "they (your driver) would have needed to pay £0.70 from the time of entry at 17:51 until 6pm and another £2.00 from 6pm until the time that they leave the car park or upto 8am the next morning".

3.So they're seriously expecting a disabled person to pay from entry(!) to the car park (9 minutes), come back to the car at 18:00 and pay another £2.00? This seems really unreasonable to me, given that they include a photocopy of my blue badge along with the above, so they are aware they are dealing with a disabled person. This also appears to be contradicted by bwlegal in their reply to my letter before claim (April 2020) where they state "Our client is not obliged to provide parking for partial hours. You paid for 1 hours parking and overstayed by 16 minutes".

4.PPS are a member of the IPC and the IPC state that a grace period should be 10 minutes "The IPC Code of Practice stipulates that a parking operator must allow a motorist 10 minutes after the expiry of a permitted period of parking, to leave a car park without incurring a parking charge." 
https://theipc.info/brandings/2/resources/documents/Marking the lines v1 14102019.pdf

I can't find where the IPC CoP doesn't state the above 10 minutes grace period. How do I then include the relevant clauses in my defence? The only text I can find on their CoP (https://theipc.info/resources/brandings/brandmedia_2_Code-of-Practice.pdf) is:
"#15. Grace Periods 15.1 Drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to park and read any signs so they may make an informed decision as to whether or not to remain on the site. 15.2 Drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to leave a site after a pre-paid or permitted period of parking has expired."
(https://theipc.info/brandings/2/resources/documents/Marking the lines v1 14102019.pdf)

[b]Please can someone tell if if the below is good enough to include in my defence please? Can this also be included in my counter-claim? Does it matter which number it is included under? Thank you! [/b]

The Equality Act 2010 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/20 states that 20. (3) The first requirement is a requirement, where a provision, criterion or practice of A's puts a disabled person at a substantial disadvantage in relation to a relevant matter in comparison with persons who are not disabled, to take such steps as it is reasonable to have to take to avoid the disadvantage.

Having known since December 2019 that the Defendant was a disabled person in possession of a 'blue badge', the Claimant suggests returning to the car after staying for 5 minutes, having paid 70p for an hour's parking, to pay an additional sum of £2. This is unreasonable for a disabled person and puts the Defendant at a "substantial disadvantage". If the Claimant were to rely on the position of their legal representative, bwlegal, that I overstayed by 16 minutes, the IPC Code of Practice (part unknown) persons are entitled to overstay by 10 minutes, known as the 'grace period'. The Defendant argues that it would be reasonable to extend this 'grace period' to at least the additional 6 minutes the Defendant overstayed for, for people with disabilities.

Hello again.

Can anyone please tell me whether the above broadly reads OK? Would I put it in my defence or counter-claim section?

Do I need to quote the relevant sections of the IPC CoP, The Equality Act and can I put hyperlinks in my defence or counter-claim?

How does someone quote a section of a CoP or the Equality Act in text?

Thanks.

D_P_Dance

Quote the protected characteristic bit

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/equality-act/protected-characteristics

[Deleted User]

Ok, the below is what I wrote for point 3. of my defence, using the template. Please can you give it a once over and let me know if this reads OK? Thank you.

"The Defendant’s car entered the car park at 17:51. The signage was not visible from the car as it was dark and the signage was not lit. A ticket was purchased for one hour’s parking at 17:55, following the Claimant's terms and conditions. The Defendant noted the ticket had an expiry time of 18:00 but as the Defendant paid for an hour’s parking, the expiry time was taken to be in error. The Defendant later return to the car and exited the car park at 19:07. The claimant stated in their letter, dated 20/12/2019, that in order to avoid a “parking charge notice” the Defendant needed to pay from entry to the car park at 17:51, pay £0.70 for parking until 18:00, return to the car and pay an additional £2 until the exit at 19:07. The above is contradicted by the Claimant’s legal representative, bwlegal, in their letter to dated 23/04/2020. Bwlegal agreed with the Defendant that an hour’s parking was paid for but that the Defendant overstayed by 16 minutes. The Claimant are bound by their accredited trade association’s (ATA) terms and conditions. The Claimant’s ATA, the IPC, state in their code of practice, page 13, part b, 15.1, 15.2 that a “reasonable” amount of time should be given to a motorist after entry to a car park, and before purchase of a ticket, to make an informed choice on whether to park or not. The IPC also state that a separate 10 minutes should be given to a motorist, after expiry of the ticket, to exit the car park. These periods of time are known as “grace periods”.

If either of the above positions of the Claimant and their legal representative, bwlegal, is taken to be true, then they tacitly admit that neither “grace period” was granted to the Defendant. Given that the Defendant is a disabled person with protected characteristics under the Equality Act (2010), “reasonable adjustments” are expected to be made above and beyond the existing terms and conditions. The Defendant contends that the alleged 16 minute overstay is reduced to 6 minutes if the 10 minute “grace period” at expiry of parking is considered. This is further reduced by a reasonable amount if the “grace period” at entry to the car park is further considered. The Defendant asserts that the alleged 16 minute overstay is wiped out on the basis of grace periods alone and before consideration of "reasonable adjustments".

Coupon-mad

Too long.  That detail is not needed yet.

Save this for WS stage and personally, I would NEVER state that you 'noted that the ticket showed an expiry time' of just 5 minutes after coming in:

The Defendant noted the ticket had an expiry time of 18:00 but as the Defendant paid for an hour’s parking, the expiry time was taken to be in error. The Defendant later return to the car and exited the car park at 19:07. The claimant stated in their letter, dated 20/12/2019, that in order to avoid a “parking charge notice” the Defendant needed to pay from entry to the car park at 17:51, pay £0.70 for parking until 18:00, return to the car and pay an additional £2 until the exit at 19:07. The above is contradicted by the Claimant’s legal representative, bwlegal, in their letter to dated 23/04/2020. Bwlegal agreed with the Defendant that an hour’s parking was paid for but that the Defendant overstayed by 16 minutes. 

Replace all of the above with two sentences stating what time the car was captured leaving past the exit, and then that the Defendant correctly paid for their hour's parking and the Defendant denies any breach of the terms on offer to drivers arriving before 6pm.

Also remove your entire final paragraph.

D_P_Dance

And, if they persist, consider a claim for disability discrimination if appropriate.  

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/legal-system/small-claims/making-a-small-claim/

[Deleted User]

Coupon-mad said:

Too long.  That detail is not needed yet.

Save this for WS stage and personally, I would NEVER state that you 'noted that the ticket showed an expiry time' of just 5 minutes after coming in:

The Defendant noted the ticket had an expiry time of 18:00 but as the Defendant paid for an hour’s parking, the expiry time was taken to be in error. The Defendant later return to the car and exited the car park at 19:07. The claimant stated in their letter, dated 20/12/2019, that in order to avoid a “parking charge notice” the Defendant needed to pay from entry to the car park at 17:51, pay £0.70 for parking until 18:00, return to the car and pay an additional £2 until the exit at 19:07. The above is contradicted by the Claimant’s legal representative, bwlegal, in their letter to dated 23/04/2020. Bwlegal agreed with the Defendant that an hour’s parking was paid for but that the Defendant overstayed by 16 minutes. 

Replace all of the above with two sentences stating what time the car was captured leaving past the exit, and then that the Defendant correctly paid for their hour's parking and the Defendant denies any breach of the terms on offer to drivers arriving before 6pm.

Also remove your entire final paragraph.

Thanks for your feedback! How is the below? Why remove the final paragraph? Saving for WS or just rubbish? Thanks again!

3.       The Defendant’s car entered the car park at 17:51. The signage was not visible from the car as it was dark and the signage was not lit. A ticket was purchased for one hour’s parking at 17:55, following the Claimant's terms and conditions. The car was captured leaving past the exit at 19:07. The Defendant correctly paid for their hour's parking and the Defendant denies any breach of the terms on offer to drivers arriving before 6pm. The Claimant is bound by their accredited trade association’s (ATA) terms and conditions. The Claimant’s ATA, the IPC, state in their code of practice, page 13, part b, 15.1, 15.2 that a “reasonable” amount of time should be given to a motorist after entry to a car park, and before purchase of a ticket, to make an informed choice on whether to park or not. The IPC also state that a separate 10 minutes should be given to a motorist, after expiry of the ticket, to exit the car park. These periods of time are known as “grace periods”.