Parking Eye N24 General Form of Judgement or Order

JordanFish

Bit of background:

I entered Pangbourne Working Mens Club in Oxford one evening to ask for directions as I do not live in the local area. It was dark and I parked my car for less than 15 minutes not knowing the car park was enforced by parking eye. Signage was high up, unlit and impossible to read. Grace period is 15 minutes and I exceeded this by 3 minutes (apparantely). The entrance/exit to the car park is also the only access to some private lock-ups.

Defence was filed based on the above (grace periods, inadequate signage, ANPR camera accuracy, cameras covering an entrance to a private lock up). Witness statement and evidence also filed covering the same points.

Due to covid, the claim was agreed to be settled on papers alone (no hearing, judge decides verdict based on witness statements and evidence from claimant and defendant). I have now received a General Form of Judgement or Order (N24) that states:

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. Judgement for the claimant for £100.
2. Defendant do pay the claimants costs of £100.
3. Payment be made by 21 days.

REASONS:

1. Per Parking Eye v Beavis, parking charges of up to £100 are not penalties and have the aim of determining wrongful parking.

2. I am satisfied per exhibit two of *PE rep’s* statement that the claimant was authorised to manage the car park by the landowner.

3. I am satisfied that there was a grace period applied to the Defendants parking period and that once he overstayed the grace period a parking charge was applied.

4. I do not accept that the signage was inadequate, unfit and insufficient. On all of the photos I have seen the signage is, in my judgement, sufficiently clear and at least one of the signs was lit (p.26 of *PE Reps* exhibits).

5. I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the ANPR images accurately show the times of entry/exit from the car park.

My questions are:

1. Can I appeal?

2. Have I got grounds to appeal successfully?

3. If I don’t appeal, what do I do now? How do I pay?

Any help will be greatly appreciated

Coupon-mad

Due to covid, the claim was agreed to be settled on papers alone (no hearing, judge decides verdict based on witness statements and evidence from claimant and defendant). 

As we always warn against agreeing to this, no wonder you lost.  There is an entire thread about TELEPHONE HEARINGS (that includes wording to refuse a hearing on the papers during COVID) and a warning from bargepole in the NEWBIES thread never to agree to a hearing 'on the papers'. 

You were up against a legal department who do 'papers' for a living.   A terrible decision to agree to that.

In practice that gave you a 99% chance of losing, in our experience, rather than the 99% win rate you could have had, if you'd attended by phone and refused the hearing on the papers. We see this all the time.

You have no grounds to appeal.  You pay by ringing up P/Eye to pay by card, or posting a cheque.

Umkomaas

Due to covid, the claim was agreed to be settled on papers alone (no hearing, judge decides verdict based on witness statements and evidence from claimant and defendant).

Oh no, please, anyone reading this, it is a glaring example of why not to opt for a hearing 'on the papers'. ☠️

henrik777

Whilst i fully support anyone who says don't do it on papers for a host of reasons, i don't think we can say for certain, on what's been posted, that face to face would have been different in this case.


1. The wording suggests to me the have an "interesting" take on Beavis.
2. Is evidence based so.....
3. Ditto
4. Ditto, although perhaps at a hearing an interjection stating the 1 lit sign was nowhere near the parker could have been made.
5. Without a double dip i think that almost always would be the case.

£100 costs seems a bit funky though, unless i'm out of touch, as i can't recall seeing them claim £100.

DoaM

£100 PCN + £50 solicitors fee + £25 filing fee + £25 hearing fee?

JordanFish

In hindsight I should of refused the hearing on papers but due to covid circumstances I convinced myself that this was the only way to proceed. Big mistake on my part.

The issue I have now is that the claim was always for £100 + £75 costs (I have this in several correspondence from the court) but now is for £100 + £100 costs. How have the costs gone up and is this even allowed? With the claim being settled on papers it means PE's legal representative didn't have to attend court so the costs should have gone down if anything.

I have rang the court and have been told my only option to fight this is to file an N244 which costs £255. Makes no financial sense to do that. Does anyone know what else I can do to fight this?

nosferatu1001

The hearing fee. You forgot to add that on. The hearing fee si £25, whether on papers or not. theyc annot claim fo rthis at the outset, because the fee is not paid at the point the claim is issued. 
No, you cannot fight this. And theyre wrong. Its an appeal, with different costs, but youre going to have to show how the judge erred in law and NOT in fact ,because an appeal judge is highly unlikely to go behind a judges finding on facts. 

Umkomaas

In hindsight I should of refused the hearing on papers but due to covid circumstances I convinced myself that this was the only way to proceed. Big mistake on my part.

Apparently Covid cannot be caught through telephone or video contact!

With the claim being settled on papers it means PE's legal representative didn't have to attend court so the costs should have gone down if anything.

Legal Costs (capped at £50) almost always relate to the costs of the legal work employed in serving the claim and its associated, ensuing, paperwork. It's not about the cost of representation at a hearing. 

Coupon-mad

The £100 is correct.  As others have said, they paid a £25 hearing fee.

Whilst @henrik777 is right that we can't be sure if you'd have won or not if you'd simply asked for a telephone hearing as this forum advises, a really important issue that could have been examined more closely was for you to say:

''But that supposedly 'lit' sign was not only nowhere near my car and, moreover, it wasn't actually lit that night. No signs were.  The C's evidence photos are from a completely different month/year and fail to show where my car was in relation to any signs.  However, it is a fact that no signs were lit and I was there in person and am not an unobservant driver. This was the C's claim to prove and their photos from another month/year fail to do that, on the balance of probabilities, against a D who was a true witness.  It was pitch black and I was given no opportunity to learn of any terms at all.''

This is why people MUST attend hearings, to be heard.  Too late now.  He made his decision based upon the evidence before him and you elected not to be heard by agreeing to what you should never have agreed to.  An expensive lesson because you can't appeal a finding of fact - there was no error.  He decided it based upon what the papers were telling him and you can't reverse that and whisper in his ear now.

Going off piste from this forum's advice and making assumptions that an Order asking if you agree to what the court proposes to do (when it is completely unfair on Defendants) is never a good option, even though I say so myself.