Claim Form received from VCS for stopping at Southend Airport

nosferatu1001

Not just to the court - it has to get to the claimant as well, as the Order tells you.

50_plus

Good point - but they also have to get their bundle to me by Monday

50_plus

Here is my draft witness statement for comments/advice.  Do I need to include the relevant CPR's in my evidence bundle or can I assume the court is already familiar with them ?

Claim No.

Between

Vehicle Control Services Limited (Claimant)

and

              (Defendant)


WITNESS STATEMENT
I,                                                                      of                                              , will say as follows:

I am the Defendant in this matter. Attached to this statement is a paginated bundle of documents marked Exhibit  01 to 12 to which I will refer.

EXHIBIT 01 - Parking Charge Notice (PCN) Notice to Keeper (NTK) dated  xxxxxxx   from the claimant showing a photograph of my vehicle stopped at a zebra crossing with pedestrians passing in front of the vehicle

EXHIBIT 02 - Enlarged copy of the photograph from the PCN

EXHIBIT 03 – My appeal against the Parking Charge Notice submitted through MyParkingCharge.co.uk

EXHIBIT 04 - Claimant’s appeal rejection letter dated xxxxxxxx

EXHIBIT 05 – Copy of Civil Procedure Rule 16.4

EXHIBIT 06 -  Copy of Car Insurance Schedule

EXHIBIT 07 - Copy of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA)

EXHIBIT 08 – Copy of Section 192(1) of the Road Traffic Act

EXHIBIT 09 -  Copy of Southend-on-Sea Municipal Airport Byelaws 1980

EXHIBIT 10 -. Parking Eye Ltd vs Beavis (2015) UKSC 67

EXHIBIT 11 – Examples of additional charges being considered an abuse of process

EXHIBIT 12 – Civil Procedure Rule 3.3(4) 

 

 

1.    I received a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) Notice to Keeper (NTK) on or around xxxxxxx (see EXHIBIT 01).  The PCN states “Contravention Reason:  46) STOPPING IN A ZONE WHERE STOPPING IS PROHIBITED” at Southend Airport.  The PCN then goes on to state that the driver of the vehicle is liable to the Parking Charge and claims that the period of parking  was before the Contravention Time of 15:13.  The first photograph provided (see EXHIBIT 02) is time stamped 15:13:30 and clearly shows the vehicle stopped at a zebra crossing with pedestrians passing in front of the car.  It appears that the Claimant is suggesting that the vehicle should not have stopped to let the pedestrians cross, and it is this act of stopping for which they are claiming

 

2.    I appealed against the PCN on the Claimants online portal (see EXHIBIT 03) explaining that the vehicle is shown to be stopped (for a period of approximately 20 seconds) in order to allow pedestrians to cross a zebra crossing but my appeal was rejected

 

3.    The Claimants appeal rejection letter (see EXHIBIT 04) states “A review of our CCTV evidence has confirmed that on the date in question, your vehicle stopped to drop off a passenger on the access road where restrictions apply.”  On the contrary, their evidence clearly shows that this was not the reason for stopping (see EXHIBIT 02) and that the driver was obliged to stop and give precedence to the pedestrians on the crossing in accordance with the Road Traffic Enactments

 

4.    The passenger of the vehicle admits to getting out while the driver was stopped at the zebra crossing but without the permission of the driver

 

5.    The Particulars of Claim submitted by the Claimant do not clarify in what capacity they believe I am liable but state that the Defendant “was the registered keeper and/or driver” of the vehicle.  This appears to be “fishing” for liability and is not a “concise statement of the facts on which the claimant relies” in accordance with the requirements of Civil Procedure Rule 16.4 (see EXHIBIT 05)

 

6.    The vehicle is insured and used by more than one driver (see EXHIBIT 06) and the driver of the vehicle on the day in question has not been evidenced by the Claimant on any occasion.  There is no reasonable presumption in law that the keeper was the driver so I assume that they are pursuing me “as the registered keeper of the vehicle” as warned in their letter of xxxxxxxxx, because I declined to name the driver.  They claimed to be entitled to pursue me as the keeper under Section 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA)

 

7.    Schedule 4 of PoFA allows recovery of unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle but the first paragraph 1 (1) (a) states that it only applies “in respect of parking of the vehicle on relevant land:”, (see EXHIBIT 07).   The definition of “relevant land” is given in paragraph 3 (1) where subsection (c) excludes “any land ……..on which the parking of a vehicle is subject to statutory control”   

 

8.    The road on which the alleged contravention took place is subject to the Road Traffic Act 1988, (RTA), by virtue of Section 192(1) of RTA and it  being a road “to which the public has access”, (see EXHIBIT 08).  It is also subject to the Southend-on-Sea Municipal Airport Byelaws 1980 (see EXHIBIT 09).   Schedule 4, of PoFA therefore, does not apply, and the Claimant is unable to hold the keeper of the vehicle liable for the charges

 

9.    Furthermore, Section C of the NTK (see EXHIBIT 01) states that notification of driver/hirer/keeper details must be made within 28 days of the Issue Date (posted).  Paragraph 9(f) of PoFA Schedule 4 states that the response period is “28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given” and paragraph 9(6) states the “given” date for a “notice sent by post is to be presumed, …… to have been delivered (and so “given” for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4)) on the second working day after the day on which it is posted;”.   As such, the Claimant’s NTK does not meet the requirements of PoFA Schedule 4 (see EXHIBIT 07) so they do not have the right to claim unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle

 

10.  The Claimant seeks recovery of the original £100 parking charge plus an additional £60 described as “contractual costs and interest” or “Debt collection costs”.  No further justification or breakdown has been provided as required under Civil Procedure Rule 16.4.  (see EXHIBIT 05)

 

11.  Unless the Claimant can clearly demonstrate how these alleged additional costs have been incurred this would appear to be an attempt at double recovery.

 

12.  PoFA  Schedule 4, paragraph 4(5) (see EXHIBIT 07) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the keeper is the charge stated on the NTK which in this case is £100

 

13.  Previous parking charge cases have found that the parking charge itself is at a level to include the costs of recovery ie: Parking Eye Ltd vs Beavis (2015) UKSC 67 (see EXHIBIT 10). 

 

14.  Since 2019, many County Courts have considered claims in excess of £100 to be an abuse of process leading to them being struck out ab initio  (see EXHIBIT 11).  I am of the opinion that the Claimant in this case has knowingly submitted inflated costs and thus the entire claim should be similarly struck out in accordance with Civil Procedure Rule 3.3(4)  (see EXHIBIT 12) 

 

15.  The Claimant has not provided evidence that the landowner has given them the necessary authority to issue parking charge notices and to pursue payment by means of litigation

 

16.  The Claimant has failed to provide details of the alleged signage upon which they are relying to form a contract with the driver and neither have they demonstrated that it is appropriately positioned to allow all drivers to read and understand the terms of the alleged contract

 

17.  I would also question the existence of the alleged contract which the Claimant claims to have been breached by “stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited”.   The signage is wholly prohibitive and makes no offer of consideration.  In the absence of consideration, no contract exists   

 

 

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.


Signature of Defendant:

KeithP

Of course another reason why in this case POFA cannot be used to transfer the driver's liability to the keeper, or by the Claimant in any way at all, is explained in the first paragraph of Schedule 4 of POFA:

1 (1) This Schedule applies where—
(a) the driver of a vehicle is required by virtue of a relevant obligation to pay parking charges in respect of the parking of the vehicle on relevant land; and
(b) those charges have not been paid in full.

Note the word parking in there - twice.

The driver stopped at a pedestrian crossing. By no stretch of the imagination can that be considered parking.

Umkomaas

The 'stopping' PPCs have ridden roughshod over the law, and no one/nothing has stood in their way. We can only do so much here, but it's the victims who have to have the drive and cojones to hit them hard. Very few are up to it, and even fewer, if any, are prepared to do it!

Le_Kirk

You need the new longer Statement of Truth: -

I believe that the facts stated 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.

50_plus

KeithP said:

The driver stopped at a pedestrian crossing. By no stretch of the imagination can that be considered parking.

Thanks Keith - it's surprising how one (me) sometimes misses the obvious

50_plus

I've done a bit more research and am a bit concerned that my witness statement contains too many legal arguments which should perhaps go into my skeleton defence.  Could this go against me on the day or will the judge overlook my naivity ?  Also in item 4 I have included an admission from the passenger that they took it upon themselves to get out of the car  - do you think I should include a WS from them as well ?  Would it be admissable ?   On my directions form I said there would be no witnesses as the passenger lives in Spain

Umkomaas

No such thing as a skeleton defence. A Judge should give leeway for a an inexperienced person attending a Court for the first time. All your witness needs to do is write a Witness Statement, signed under the April 2020 Statement of Truth. There is no requirement or need for him to attend court.   

Le_Kirk

You have already submitted your defence and your witness statement is "in support of my defence as already filed" and is a narrative of what happened on the day and subsequently.  It is written in the First Person ("I") in your own words.  It is also the opportunity to provide evidence in support of arguments you have used in your defence and in your WS.  It is not an opportunity to introduce new technical or legal arguments that you missed out of your defence.