Excel claim - defence advice

Troubled42

Hi all.
I'll start by saying we've previously been harassed by PPC's in the past and we made a thread not long ago to report that 'a' parking ticket had fizzled out, much to our delight.
We are now posting on behalf of a relative to assist them in relation to a claim recently filed by Excel.
Key dates:
Incident date: 9th November 2019
NTK: 12th November 2019
Claim received - 18th March 2020
Claim acknowledgement - 23rd March 2020
Claim acknowledgement received - 24th March 2020.

Following the advice of the forum - the SAR has already been collected & has proven very useful to go over the full details in digital format rather than the toilet paper that comes through the door.

I have completed a draft Witness Statement and will intend to beef this up with a supplementary witness defence should Excel take the unfortunate step to pursue.
I do have pictures to attach - can this be done online or should I just mail this in? Or should I wait to see Excel's response first and then include this in supplementary? I only ask because my draft refers to exhibits & cannot see past the defence particulars page. Apologies for not picking up this across the many threads I've already been researching.


(*EDIT* - Not currently relevant material below. Misunderstood initially that the WS was required first when in fact it is the DEFENCE)

Witness Statement v1

1. I am XXXXX, of XXXXX, XXXXXXX, XXXXXXX, the Defendant in this matter and I am unrepresented. The facts and matters stated are true and within my own knowledge, except where indicated otherwise.

2. On XXXXX, I was due to stay at Travelodge, Derby Street, Burton-upon-Trent, and parked my vehicle registration no, XXX XXX in the car park at approximately 1430hrs.

3. I had initially thought that a car parking ticket was not required due to the lack of and poor quality signage at the site; as well as the property being a hotel. I have taken pictures to demonstrate how I missed the signage upon entering the car park and subsequently where I parked. I attach these as Exhibit A and B.

4. Shortly after checking in, I made enquiries with staff on site and they informed me pay & display was required. I then proceeded to get a ticket straight away.

5. I went to purchase a ticket for 24hrs at the cost of £3.00; despite only needing to stay for around 15 hours. I attach this ticket as Exhibit C.

6. It is at this time I noticed a ‘penalty’ notice attached to my windscreen at approximately 1610hrs.

7. I did not initially appeal the decision as I did not avoid getting a ticket. I then started receiving debt collection letters and this baseless litigation has caused me significant alarm and distress.

8. On 04.02.20, I wrote to the Claimant in relation to putting the case on hold to obtain the relevant subject access requests. The Claimant did not respond.

9. The Claim contains a substantial charge additional to the original parking charge to which they are not entitled to recover and this is an abuse of process.

10. I invite the Court to dismiss this claim in its entirety, and to award my costs of attendance at the hearing, such as are allowable pursuant to CPR 27.14.

KeithP

Put the Witness Statement on the back burner for the moment. Not needed for several months.

Your next, more immediate, step is to produce a Defence.

Have you read the second post on the NEWBIES thread yet?

What is the Issue Date on your County Court Claim Form?

Coupon-mad

As KeithP says you are at defence stage and just need to answer his question please, then go search the fourm for template defence.  You are not putting it in that little box.

Troubled42

Thanks for the swift response.
I'm a little annoyed at myself for jumping ahead. I did read post #2 but obviously not well enough. Got a bit muddled between the WS & defence.
 I've located the defence 2020 document and will edit & post accordingly.
@KeithP - Issue date is 18/03/20.

KeithP

Troubled42 said:

With a Claim Issue Date of 18th March, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 20th April 2020 to file your Defence.

That's nearly two weeks away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence, but please don't leave it to the last minute.

To file a Defence, follow the guidance in this post:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/76880595#Comment_76880595

Guidance on creating a Defence is also in that thread - in the first post on that thread.

Don't miss the deadline for filing a Defence.

Troubled42

Keith, thanks for the clarification and very helpful information.

I have extracted the following as 'my facts'. I am not sure if I should include more detail at this stage. I am assuming pictures of the car park etc are irrelevant until WS stage.

16.      The Defendant at the time was the driver although it is not established thus far, whether the car was parked, or just stopped momentarily and caught by predatory ticketing.  It is not accepted that the location included prominent signs giving ‘adequate notice’ of the onerous parking charge.

 (The relative was driving but it -Could've- been someone else.... we are not here to lie but it must be stressed that they do not know the driver at this stage. Advice on point 16?)

17.     The Claimant’s particulars refer to the car park terms and conditions being ‘clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations’. There are no terms and condition signs at the entrance of the car park from the main road. The only sign relevant states that it is a public car park and lists the appropriate charges.

18.      It is noted that the Defendant did purchase a ticket, £3.00 for 24 hours, in the car park to then find a ‘penalty’ notice attached to the Defendant’s vehicle.

Coupon-mad

 (The relative was driving but it -Could've- been someone else.... we are not here to lie but it must be stressed that they do not know the driver at this stage. Advice on point 16?)

As it is Excel whose PCNs do not comply with the POFA, I'd leave it vague for now (as per the template) that more than one person could have been driving and that a compliant NTK in accordance with para 8 or 9 of the POFA was not served.

That means you will need to change #16 and #18, both of which say what the D was doing - nope!

Snakes_Belly

Yes, yes yes. We ought to be able to knock this into a cocked hat. Fruitcake helped me with images of the car park.  The entrance from Derby Street is cluttered with other signs. I have images of this. You can enter via the Lidl car park and not see a sign. I have many images of this car park.

I fought a case and whilst I did not win I was not the biggest loser and I got off light. Keep Calm and Carry on fought two cases the first case actually on this car park and won. The second in the area but not in the car park and won with costs for unreasonable behaviour. Upstanding fought a case where the parking was on Miller's Lane and had a tyre that was slightly over onto the Derby Street Car Park. The PPC discontinued.    

Snakes_Belly

Further to this Excel's WS will be absolute crap. I know which cases they will site and they are totally irrelevant. 

Snakes_Belly

Have you looked at tripadvisor. There are a lot of people who get caught out because of the complicated permit system that they operate regarding visitors to the Travelodge. 

Troubled42

I feel like my 'facts' are a bit skimpy to be honest. Obviously there will be more beef in the WS.
as advised @Coupon-mad - I have changed #16 back to default and deleted #18.
'16.      The Defendant is not the main/only driver of this vehicle. It is not established thus far, whether the car was parked, or just stopped momentarily and caught by predatory ticketing.  It is not accepted that the location included prominent signs giving ‘adequate notice’ of the onerous parking charge. A compliant Notice to Keeper (‘NTK’) was not properly served in strict accordance with section 8 or 9 (as the case may be) of the POFA.

17.       The Claimant’s particulars refer to the car park terms and conditions being ‘clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations’. There are no terms and condition signs at the entrance of the car park from the main road. The only sign relevant states that it is a public car park and lists the appropriate charges. The entrance of the car park splits off into two roads, both of which the car park in question are accessible. There are significant differences depending on which direction the user takes in regards to the signage seen by users of the car park.'

@Snakes_Belly Welcome friend. Your post on this exact same car park was extremely informative as well as the help @Fruitcake provided in the matter.

I did indeed trawl the google and tripadvisor reviews of so many people falling into this vicious cycle on show here by Excel. Sadly Travelodge don't care much either - must be a tidy profit for them too huh..