Defence for Claim from Gladstone Solicitors for UKCPM

petsmart

Hi, I am in the process of putting together my witness statement and just needed some advice on one particular point regarding the terms and conditions found on the PPC's signage. The alleged parking contravention was for 'No parking outside of a marked bay'. However, my argument is that the markings were unclear as the lines separating the parking spaces are in darker (grey) paving stone to the rest of the car park. And the parking bay in question appears to be allocated for three cars as opposed to 2. So as the Tesco staff have attested, many customers (including myself) are unknowingly parking over the darker grey paving stones and in between the two spaces,  and assuming it is another space. In fact, when I went back recently to take more photos, a driver parked over the 'lines' before my very eyes. The PPCs signage makes no mention of 'darker' paving stones, so I wondered if this argument would carry any weight and, if so, how could I develop it further? I did make a reference to 'misleading' signage in my defence.

6. No Breach of Terms and Conditions:

6.1 I understand that the Claimant’s case relies upon the signage at the site (as shown on Page _ , photograph _, EB01) constituting a “contract” between myself and The Claimant. The “outstanding liability” on the Particulars of Claim presumably refers to the supposed “contract” formed by this signage. 

6.2 The signs stated in less than 1cm font that “By entering or remaining on this land you agree to abide by all the Terms & Conditions. Breach of ANY Term or Condition will result in the driver being liable for a Parking Charge of £100”.

6.3 The Notice to Keeper issued by The Claimant stated the reason for the disputed charge as being “No Parking Outside of a Marked Bay”. One of the terms and conditions stated on the sign was “YOU MUST PARK WHOLLY WITHIN A MARKED PARKING BAY. NO PARKING ON ROADWAYS/YELLOW LINES/PAVED/HATCHED OR LANDSCAPED AREAS. The term ‘PAVED’ is highly confusing, as the entire car park, as you can see from the photographs on page _ of EB01, is in fact paved. This would imply that by parking anywhere within the car park, would constitute a ‘breach’ of the terms and conditions. 

Le_Kirk

If you have used "confusing and unclear signage" (and painted or block paved lines count as signage) in your defence, your witness statement needs to be "in support of my defence as already filed" and should therefore contain narrative (i.e. the story of what happened on the day) and evidence to back up and support your defence.  Pictures showing how confusing it is would be an absolute boon and a killer point (IMHO).  Remember it is for the claimant to prove that the signage is clear, obvious and unambiguous.

petsmart

Thanks for your advice Le_Kirk.
I  yesterday received the claimant's witness statement. 
There are several inaccuracies in their statement.
-Signs are not the ones from the actual site. 
-Inaccurate description of the parking bays (stating that all the bays are for two cars when in fact all are for 3 vehicles except for the bay in question)
-The Tesco Express on their plan of the site is in the wrong place (other side of the car park).
I have addressed these points in my draft redacted witness statement which I have attached.
I'd be grateful if you could have a look and please advise. I feel the 'Abuse of Process' and 'Inadequate Signage' require further work.
I have not yet included all the evidence in my evidence bundle (which I referred to in my witness statement)
The witness statement has to be submitted by 18th Sept and the telephone hearing has been set for 15th October.
Thanks

nosferatu1001

Dont forget to raise that failing to include the correct signage is either
- a deliberate attempt to mislead the court, for which sanctions against hte witness should be applied 
- incompetence
In eithe rcase you ask the whole WS is struck because
- the actual witness is not present ot be questioned -> they wont be!
- it is so unreliable, for the reasons above, that it cannotb e trusted. 

Le_Kirk

In your paragraph 4.1, I think you should change it to state that: -

I do not believe that the claimant witness is familiar with or has ever been to, the Horton Retail Centre site, as is evident from ‘exhibits’ and points made in the claimant’s witness statement.

In paragraph 6.4 it is just "defence" not "defence statement"

Coupon-mad

I wrote another example today for @painbl which you can steal things from.


Also, please discuss this with friends and family and make sure they ALL contribute to the consultation - the Government is listening.

Please now make a real difference - A TASK FOR SEPTEMBER.

The Government is (this month only) consulting about a new statutory code of practice (CoP) and framework to rein in the rogue parking firms.  Read and comment on the draft CoP proposal and the enforcement framework consultation, and get everyone you know to do the same.

You will need to register to comment on the CoP and enter an occupation even if you are retired or a homemaker, but otherwise it is easy to navigate, and comment upon each section/subsection individually. You can save comments to edit later and or submit comments once you are happy with them.

https://standardsdevelopment.bsigroup.com/projects/2020-00193#/section

You do not need to register to comment on the enforcement framework which can be found here. It has a link on page 5 to make comments.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/913272/Code_Enforcement_Framework_consultation.pdf

At the very least, we say the parking charge level should be £50/£25 or higher level £70/£35, as per Council PCNs in E&W.  

And we say the added fake 'debt recovery' costs are just double counting the cost of letters, and MUST GO because that is unfair and illegal.

Please be heard.  You can bet the hundreds of PPCs will be commenting.

No apologies for repeating this vital 'call for action' to consumers, on every thread this month!

petsmart

Hi everyone, thanks for your advice. I have amended my WS accordingly. I'd be grateful if you could cast your eyes over this updated (hopefully final) version.  Just a few questions:
Should I submit it as one big file or is it alright to submit it as separate files, as I have done here? (I now also have the WS from the Tesco employee, which I have not included here)
Should exhibit photos be dated?
Does anyone have a link for the Britannia v Crosby judgement, Southampton, so I can include the full document as one of my exhibits.
And thanks Coupon-mad for letting me know about the Govt consultation, which I will definitely comment on.
Thanks in advance

Coupon-mad

Should exhibit photos be dated?

Yes.
  
The Crosby case is the 6 page Approved Judgment linked in the TEMPLATE DEFENCE thread.

It is OK to submit separate files as long as you don't exceed the email limit of the recipient (it will bounce back).

petsmart

Thanks
Attached is the Claimant's WS

nosferatu1001

Have you reviewed the likely template WS theyve given you against the threads its likely popped up in before? That bit you must do. 
For example, is the contract valid? For the right place? In the right company names?