PCN(s) UKPC - Court Claim Form (WON)

D_P_Dance

Their actual hearing bundle was about 144 pages 

I wonder what judges think when this arrives on their desks!

KnightRS

In the County Court at Romford

Claim number: F1HW66QF
UK Parking Control LTD (Claimant)

V
Xxxxxx (Defendant)

___________________________________________________

FURTHER WITNESS STATEMENT OF DEFENDANT

FOR HEARING ON 08/01/2021
___________________________________________________

1. I am xxxxx of xxxxx, and I am the defendant against whom this claim is made. The facts below are true to the best of my belief and my account has been prepared based upon my own knowledge.

2. I am providing this further statement following receiving the Claimant’s Witness Statement. I believe this is necessary in order to address certain issues that I have noted which could have an impact on the case. I will address these points and will likely refer to the Claimant’s Witness Statement (WS) throughout.

3. In point 3 of the Claimant’s WS they state that the terms and conditions of parking are clearly displayed on signage at the site. The signage in the location that I park makes no reference to “a charge of £100 will be issued against the vehicle. The terms and conditions further detail that a further charge of £60 will become due and owing in the event that an issued parking charge notice remains unpaid…” As per exhibit XX/08 the sign instead states “Failure to comply with the following at any time will result in a £100 Parking Charge (reduced to £60 if paid within 14 days). Again, I only know this after I have conducted my investigation of the area for my defence. The claimant makes the same reference in Point 14 of their WS. 


4. In point 10 of the Claimant’s WS they state that the obvious conclusion to be drawn from the signage is that parking on the road is not allowed. Unfortunately, due to the time I received their WS, I have not been able to submit a Data Protection Request. I would ask the Claimant to kindly produce their statistics around the issuing of PCNs in the very area where I had parked. I know of a number of other employees who have also received PCNs and this clearly shows that the signage referred to by the Claimant is not as obvious as they claim.

5. In point 11 of the Claimant’s WS they have stated that signage is situated throughout the site as demonstrated by their site plan in their exhibit EF/2. I have returned to the area on 05/01/2021 at approximately 1750 this would be the same conditions around the dates and times I had entered and exited the site when receiving the PCNs. I have recorded my route into the parking area. I exhibit this video as XX/13. 



We now know that there’s a sign in this location - however, during the receipt of these tickets, I did not know about this sign as I would have no reason to be looking to my right hand side due to there being fencing and bushes and the area being unlit. 



The signage that the Claimant claims is “amply situated” is actually situated in other parts of the site where I would have no reason to enter and therefore it would not of been seen by me. In fact, on 05/01/2021 around the same time as above, I decided to conduct further investigation into this and did a drive through the estate, the signage mentioned in the Claimant’s WS in exhibit EF/2 - Page 29 is unlit and cannot be seen, I exhibit this video as XX/14.



I further produce a map of my routine travel into the estate and out of the estate. I exhibit this as XX/15. In reference to exhibit EF/1 (contract between the managing agent and Claimant - I have included the boundary that UK Parking Control LTD are contracted to enforce, in my map - I will expand on this further down in my statement).  



I have examined Exhibit EF/5, the Claimant has marked in red the locations of signage they have displayed. This is not correct. I would request the court to refer to exhibit XX/13 to see the locations of any signage.



I have indeed admitted to being an employee within the site. However, I have only one route in and out and would have no reason to go anywhere else in the estate. Therefore, any signage within the estate would not be visible to me. I would ask the court to refer to my exhibit XX/13, my routine travel into and out of the estate and I standby that the only signage in that area was unlit and poorly located and once read, confusing. I reiterate that this sign was only noted when I conducted my investigation.

6. In point 12 of the Claimant’s WS they state “an offer was made to park…” As per the signage in the area of the site I am in, as stated, upon examination of the sign it makes no offer to park whatsoever. This is exhibit XX/08 in my original statement.



In relation to being put on notice after receiving the first charge notice, I would like to inform the court that I was given incorrect legal advice in relation to this matter. I was informed to ignore the PCNs as it could not be enforced.

7. In point 13 the Claimant states that it is unlikely that their employee would not issue a parking charge to a vehicle parked on the roadway. I would like the court to consider requesting the Claimant to identify and bring before the court which employee would have been in that location at that date and time. This is something that is very easy to do as there is no doubt a parking company that claims they are professional would have some form of audit in regards to duties/shifts.



I would like the court to read a news article which I exhibit as XX/16. The news article reports that UK Parking Control LTD had admitted that their employees were doctoring photographic evidence to unfairly impose parking charges. 



I would also like the court to read another news article where the same companies integrity has been called into question. They were banned twice previously by the DVLA, once in 2015 as they were cast faking time stamps on tickets and then in 2018 due to its wardens being caught telling drivers they would still be pursued for fines during the original suspension period. I exhibit this as XX/17. 



These news articles clearly show that UK Parking Control LTD cannot be relied upon. In fact in the news article the motorist had also complained in regards to signage being placed in unlit conditions. 



In the news article there is mention of another case which had successfully been thrown out of court, the defendant’s were Myke Parrot and his wife Gemma when they left their vehicle parked in their car in West Middlesex University Hospital’s parking area between February 2014 and July 2018. It transpired that UK Parking Control LTD’s contract to enforce the area had expired in November 2012. 



I am not using this as an excuse to show that I have authority to park in the location that I did. My point here that this is a completely unprofessional company who have continuously issued fines where there were no legal basis, with a history of poor signs and poor administration, I believe that this is the same situation with my case. I will further show this in the next point.

8. I refer to exhibit EF/1. As per Point 2 of the Claimant’s WS this is the contract between the Claimant and the managing agent. On the first page of the contract under “premises where we will supply the Services” it quite clearly states “Muirhead Quay, Fresh Water Estate, Barking, London, IG11 7BW. You agree that the attached site plan and boundary markings are a true and accurate description of the area that you own or occupy and require..” On the next page it continues to say “…UKPC to manage” - on page 4 of this contract, the boundary, clearly highlighted in red only covers part of the estate. My vehicle was not parked within this boundary - thus meaning UK Parking Control LTD have no authority to enforce PCNs in the location where I had parked, which is again shown in exhibit XX/15.



Enforcing PCNs in a location where they have no authority to is something UK Parking Control LTD is known to do as per the news articles provided. May I please request the court to make an order for the contract in EF/1 to be checked. There is no expiration date listed, and I strongly believe this needs to be checked to ensure whether the contract is invalid and other motorists haven’t suffered through the issuing of invalid PCNs.  

Statement of truth:

I believe that the facts in this Witness Statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

SIGNATURE:
PRINTED NAME:

Date: 05/01/2021

Exhibit List:

XX/13 - Video clip of driving into the site and into the parking location;
XX/14 - Drive into the other part of the estate;
XX/15 - Map of my route in and route out of the estate.
(Exhibit includes area UK Parking Control LTD is contracted to operate in as per exhibit EF/1).
XX/16 - News Article of UK Parking Control LTD admitting doctoring evidence
XX/17 - News Article of UK Parking Control LTD - Abusing process

DEFENDANT’S SCHEDULE OF COSTS
Loss of earnings through attendance at court hearing 13/10/2020: £95.00
Further costs for Claimant’s misconduct, pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 44.11
Research, preparation and drafting documents (16 hours at Litigant in Person rate of £19 per hour): £304

Stationary, printing, photocopying and postage: £24

TOTAL COSTS CLAIMED £423.00
SIGNATURE:
PRINTED NAME:
Date: 05/01/2021

Notes:

- This was probably me going overboard. I think I lost the plot when I went through their WS and noted they didn't have any authority to enforce restrictions in the area I had parked and then on top of that basically called me a liar about the time I spoke to their ticket inspector.

- I don't think it's usual practice to use news articles in witness statements, but I only included them so that at least it casts some doubt in the Judges' mind.

- Also, yes I did use someone's schedule of costs. I thank the person in advance. I've forgotten who it is but as soon as I remember, I'll post a direct thank you!

-Probably didn't need to ask the court to order the Claimant to produce stats/witnesses. I don't think it would have worked in any case.

KnightRS

D_P_Dance said:

Their actual hearing bundle was about 144 pages 

I wonder what judges think when this arrives on their desks!

Not going to lie, when I first saw it I thought "Oh s***". When I started reading through it, it became evident it was just trying way too hard to hide the fact they had messed up in the first place.

Le_Kirk

You might want to edit your post to remove your claim number!
All paragraphs should be numbered.

The signage that the Claimant claims is “amply situated” is actually situated in other parts of the site where I would have no reason to enter and therefore it would not of have been seen by me.

You need to check through the rest of your (supplementary) WS and remove this and any other grammatical errors.

KnightRS

Le_Kirk said:

You might want to edit your post to remove your claim number!
All paragraphs should be numbered.

The signage that the Claimant claims is “amply situated” is actually situated in other parts of the site where I would have no reason to enter and therefore it would not of have been seen by me.

You need to check through the rest of your (supplementary) WS and remove this and any other grammatical errors.

It's too late now - case is over hah - was just posting all the relevant docs in case someone found them useful.

The paragraphs were numbered, but when I was copying and pasting here from the PDF I submitted to the court, the formatting was going weird, so I removed some of the numbers.

Coupon-mad

KnightRS said:

D_P_Dance said:

Their actual hearing bundle was about 144 pages 

I wonder what judges think when this arrives on their desks!

Not going to lie, when I first saw it I thought "Oh s***".
When I started reading through it, it became evident it was just trying way too hard to hide the fact they had messed up in the first place.

That sums up all parking charge claims!  People often get scared when hundreds of pages of so-called evidence arrive.  But when they really read it they realise the case is as full of holes as Swiss cheese.

bargepole

D_P_Dance said:

Their actual hearing bundle was about 144 pages 

I wonder what judges think when this arrives on their desks!

144 pages? That's just a post-it note.

I have a case coming up in a couple of weeks, where the Claimant's bundle has just arrived from DCB Legal, running to 365 pages. When you read it in detail, and look carefully at their 'evidence', it becomes apparent that they have very helpfully shot themselves in both feet, and helped to prove the defendant's case.

Snakes_Belly

Noticed that the OP used a number of exhibits. IMO images are very important. It was the image in this claim that decided the case in a few minutes.   

nosferatu1001

I'd be drafting a letter before action as well. Easy settlement offer I would estimate. 

Snakes_Belly

bargepole said:

D_P_Dance said:

Their actual hearing bundle was about 144 pages 

I wonder what judges think when this arrives on their desks!

144 pages? That's just a post-it note.

I have a case coming up in a couple of weeks, where the Claimant's bundle has just arrived from DCB Legal, running to 365 pages. When you read it in detail, and look carefully at their 'evidence', it becomes apparent that they have very helpfully shot themselves in both feet, and helped to prove the defendant's case.

Was this a hard copy?  A tree must have died for this.