Going to court on this one need advice

Christhetechnicalguy

Ok I’m on it thanks! 

Christhetechnicalguy

So here is the first draft of my WS any comments are welcome ... please be kind 🤣🤣 coupon mad you may recognise some of the text 👍 

In the County Court at Sheffield

Claim Number G5QXxx

Between

Vehicle Control Services LTD (Claimant)

And

The (Defendant)

Witness Statement

I am  The Defendant in this matter.

It is admitted that the Defendant is the registered keeper of the vehicle in question.

 The defendant has no liability as they are the Keeper of the vehicle, and the Private Parking Company has failed to comply with the strict provisions of PoFA 2012 to hold anyone other than the driver liable for the charges.

The driver has not been evidenced on any occasion

There is no presumption in law that the keeper was the driver and nor is a keeper obliged to name the driver to a private parking form. This was confirmed in the POPLA Annual Report 2015 by the POPLA lead Adjudicator and barrister, Henry Greensdale, when explaining POFA 2012 “principles of keeper liability” as set out in schedule 4.

The Notice to keeper/driver (Exhibit number here) issue date was 01/09/2016. The alleged contravention took place on 02/07/2016. I have included a copy of POFA2012 Schedule 4 (Exhibit number Here).  This clearly states that the Notice to Keeper must be served, no earlier than 28 days and not more than 56 days from the date of the alleged contravention. The time from the alleged contravention to the serving of the Notice to Keeper was 61 days. The IPC code of practice to which the claimant is a member also reflects this (exhibit IPC code of practice)

I was totally unaware of this Parking Charge Notice against the driver until I received the first correspondence from HM Courts and Tribunals Service, Money Claim Online, County Court Business Centre in January of 2020. I filed my defence and was confident that nothing would come of it as I had had no contact from VCS at all and here was a claim for a PCN which was three and a half years old.

I applied for a Subject Access Request from the claimant on the 27/01/2020 (Exhibit number here) in order to assess why I was being pursued for monies allegedly owed to the claimant. I received a reply along with all of their evidence. 

The IPC code of practice sets out strict guidelines for signage at the entrance to and throughout its member’s carparks. 

(Exhibit X photo of car in bay with blue ball signage)

Clearly shows my car in a bay with a parking notice directly in front of it stating “Blue Ball customers only”. Next to it, there is a blurred image of another type of sign, which the writing can be made out to say “private land”. The whole substance of the claim is a breach of the claimant’s terms and conditions, which has the mechanism of forming a contract between two parties. Where and what are the terms and conditions that relate to the bays, which are signed “blue ball customers only”. 

At the very least, it is very confusing to have two different types of sign relating to specific areas of a car park and surely, the signage should be clear enough to reflect this in order for it to form a legally binding contract? How is it possible to prove that the driver was or was not a customer of the Blue Ball on this occasion?

Photographic evidence supplied by the claimant with the incorrect date of the alleged contravention. 

When comparing (ExhibitA and Exhibit B Parking charge notice and photos of car) It is clear to see that the date of the alleged contravention was 02/07/2016, but the date on the photographic evidence is 07/02/2016. The photographs were not taken on the same day as the parking ticket was issued? in fact, the photos were taken approximately 5 months earlier. 

 

I invite the court to dismiss this claim in its entirety

Statement of truth

I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true.

Signature 

Date

KeithP

 It is clear to see that the date of the alleged contravention was 02/07/2016, but the date on the photographic evidence is 07/02/2016. The photographs were not taken on the same day as the parking ticket was issued? in fact, the photos were taken approximately 5 months earlier. 

In my opinion, you need to be prepared for their rebuttal saying that is simply two different people/machines formatting the date differently - dd/mm/2016 versus mm/dd/2016.

All paragraphs need numbering.

Christhetechnicalguy

there were numbers when I copied but they have gone. As for formatting surely that’s up to the ppc too to prove that’s what it was, not dismiss it because the numbers are the same but the wrong way around? The proof has to be conclusive there is reasonable doubt the photos were not taken on the same day?

KeithP

Further comment:

Replace the words "Private Parking Company" with "Claimant".

What's the point of this paragraph?...

I applied for a Subject Access Request from the claimant on the 27/01/2020 (Exhibit number here) in order to assess why I was being pursued for monies allegedly owed to the claimant. I received a reply along with all of their evidence.

Fruitcake

You need to make statements, not ask questions. With regard to the Ts and Cs, don't ask what and where they are, state that there were none, or were not clear.

Your statement of truth at the end is out of date. Use a search engine to find the newer up to date version.

Christhetechnicalguy

yes I totally agree. I’m not sure how to write those parts. Any ideas? Thanks for your comment👍

Christhetechnicalguy

KeithP said:

Further comment:

Replace the words "Private Parking Company" with "Claimant".

What's the point of this paragraph?...

I applied for a Subject Access Request from the claimant on the 27/01/2020 (Exhibit number here) in order to assess why I was being pursued for monies allegedly owed to the claimant. I received a reply along with all of their evidence.

I had already submitted a defence ..prematurely because I thought it was a scam. So I am trying to explain what I then did to obtain the “evidence” in order to formulate the WS to enable my defence. I have read on here the WS is “the story” as such. 

1505grandad

Typo  -  "..........nor is a keeper obliged to name the driver to a private parking (form). "   -  (firm)

Coupon-mad

Where's your stuff about the abuse of process of adding a false £60 in fake costs?

Where's the part about no landowner authority because VCS don't own the car park?

What about stuff about the POFA and no keeper liability?

You also need a Summary Costs Assessment.

Have a look at the threads by @Chefdave and @keypulse - both of them showed their documents.