NEWBIES L B C AND DEBT CLAIM

Coupon-mad

Quite right, how would you know when standing at what looks like the only machine (which is not working) that there are other machines that are not in view? If the two machines were next to each other that's fine, but not if it's nowhere in view, with other cars blocking a clear view of the car park.

Snakes_Belly

I would take some screen shots from the entrance to the car park and from the ticket machine that was out of order that would show that there was not another machine visible. Images are important on the WS.

Have the PPC sent the ticket machine records for this claim or was it the first claim that you paid off? You have to be very careful with evidence that a PPC produces for court as they have been known to doctor evidence. They have also been also known to use data from a different day on the basis that no one will notice. It's difficult for a litigant in person to have to deal with underhand tactics but be aware of them.

I was in a very similar situation to yourself. I parked in a car park near a station as I was catching a train and I had about 15-20 mins to spare in which time I had to park, walk to the station, buy a ticket and go onto the platform. The car park was close to the station but sometimes there was a queue for tickets. I needed to catch this particular train as I had business to conduct in Nottingham and I had already been delayed on the way to Burton on Trent. 

Ticket machine would not accept my coins and the display on the machine said that it was not in service?. The signage said that if the ticket machine was not working to use another machine. I did not just take a cursory glance around but I had a walk about and asked people that were working in workshops in the arches. Could not find another machine so I left a note and went about my business as by this time if I had moved my car I would have missed the train and would have had to return home. Needless to say that I received a PCN when I returned.

I appeal to the PPC and IAS and during the IAS appeal I noticed on their plan of the car that there were other machines.  I went back to the car park and one machine was sited on another operator's car park where the PPC had a some spaces. The other was by a fire door with no signage and was blocked from view when the fire door was open. 

The PPC though did not fight the claim on the basis of these other machines. They said I should have moved my car. That was their main argument. Judge disagreed but thought that I should pay the tariff for the day (£3.00) with no costs awarded to the Claimant. 

I would defend your claim on frustration of contract and lack of signage over the ticket machines in what looks like a large car park with a section that is stepped lower. There may be other issues such as the abuse of process which is useful to reduce the value of the claim and landowner authority.  

Snakes_Belly

Further to my comment above it would seem that the ticket machine may have been full. These companies should know the optimum time that their machines will need to be emptied and should ensure that they are emptied regularly especially in towns and would imagine that car park in question is very busy on match days.  

Regarding the new CoP. This is not in force yet and is not retrospective but may have some influence. I commented on the mention of location of ticket machines on signage which I thought was a very good idea as some car parks are ambiguous and have several operators with no demarcation between the two. You may almost think that the PPC's go out of their way to catch people out      

Darren104

Snakes_Belly said:

I would defend your claim on frustration of contract and lack of signage over the ticket machines in what looks like a large car park with a section that is stepped lower. There may be other issues such as the abuse of process which is useful to reduce the value of the claim and landowner authority.  

The ticket machine that was out of order was wrapped in a  bin liner, but it was the older type machine, the one where you pay and display, which is no longer there any more, been replaced by these new ones. I have a picture of that one that i took near the time. I  know about the abuse process and that is already been included in Coupon-mad's template for the defence, which is very kind of her to have done. I have telephoned the Wolves council to see who pays the business rates for the land and they said it was NCP so they must be the landowners. The ticket machine records were from the SAR that Popla sent me, the same ones in the SAR that NCP sent me.   

Snakes_Belly

I would check those ticket machine records very carefully.

Take a screen shot image from google maps April 2017. Aug 2017, and 2018. You use the street view slider to do this and click on it to bring up the main image. The car park is very full and I could not see the second ticket machine from the ring road or from the main entry. Some ticket machines have a large "pay here" sign over the top. These don't and I would push that fact in your defence.

I would also push the fact that the new CoP practice is requiring that the location of the ticket machines is stated on the signage.

This would be a very busy car park and would be full at most times and I would stress that in your defence as the PPC is likely to show images of an empty car park. In reality it would not be like that.

As for moving your car. There are cases where the judge has dismissed this. 

  

Darren104

Hi, guys, been a while. I am still at the LBC stage. I sent a second letter in reply to their response on 1st December, 2020 and heard nothing till now that being on  9th March. They sent me a 9 page letter in response to all my questioning, They have not provided me with the name of the landowner. They have confirmed that NCP are the leaseholders. They have raised a few points i would like your comments on,  and how i can reply with a positive response. Please see attached images of snippets from their letter. The CRA, POFA  Jullian case. Thank you.

nosferatu1001

Copy out the questions you have. 

Darren104

Hello guys. I would like to give you an update on this letter before claim from BW Legal, dated 18th September 2020. I responded with a couple of letters, they sent a few back. The last letter that I  sent was on 17th April 2021, which was 18 pages in length, (as well as attachments). I received an acknowledgment to confirm they had received this letter  but they never bothered to reply or deal with the issues and questions raised. Now after 18 months of hearing nothing from this company, they have decided to issue me with another Letter before Claim for this same parking charge.  I have till 6th December 2022 to respond. Can someone give me advice about this please and what i should do about it. Are they allowed to do this, when they have not dealt with the original LBC. Thank you in advance.

Grizebeck

Yes they can
Just await the court claim

Coupon-mad

Respond and refer them to the 2021 correspondence and say you are still awaiting a substantive (or any) reply.