DB Legal & Premier Parking Logistics

Snakes_Belly

D_P_Dance said:

If ticket machines are incorrectly calibrated the matter should be reported to Trading Standards, there may be criminality involved.  

There has been a couple of instances on different car parks in Birmingham where the driver has put in the correct parking tariff and a ticket for a lesser amount was issued. This was the same operator and PCN's were issued. One of these cases was discontinued last week and I think that the other has yet to be heard.

houndsoflove

Well I am thoroughly confused!

Attended a hearing today scheduled for 30 mins.  Judge stated that this couldn’t be done in 30 mins and no idea why it has been allocated that time, however no WS statement from the claimant so was scheduled to be struck out.  Claimants rep flustered about a bit then found a copy of an email that had been sent to the courts so Judge noted as an administrative issue.

Then asked me what my defence was, and I started with the landowner contract to which he stopped me and send these matter tend not to dwell on the contract and assume claimant would be able to rebut this.  Thought this was an odd comment given these issue are based around contract law?

I then noted that the payment machine wasn’t working to which he turned to the rep and said this appears to be a fairly valid defence.  The rep pricked up on a photo of the card that I had left on my windscreen stating that the machine was faulty and pointed out that I had crossed through a date and time above indicating that not paying was a regular occurrence??  Wasn’t to sure what to make of that, but the judge then ended the session stating it would be rescheduled for 2 hours on another date and that the claimant should resend their evidence.

So another days annual leave required and still have the issue hanging around!

D_P_Dance

IMO a valid contractt between the PPC and the landowner is a sine qua non.  The claimant MUST surely be abe to produce one before a claim can be considered.  IMO the judge was wrong.  

Coupon-mad

Doesn't your re-used bit of card suggest that the machine was faulty as a regular occurrence? 

houndsoflove

Agreed, I didn’t get a chance to reply to that point as it ended fairly abruptly.  At least I have had a taster session 🙈

houndsoflove

Yes, all done and I have used and amended the letter posted by @Jenni_D and sent this to my MP 👍🏻

Snakes_Belly

"The rep picked up on a photo of the card that I had left on my windscreen stating that the machine was faulty and pointed out that I had crossed through a date and time above indicating that not paying was a regular occurrence??  Wasn’t to sure what to make of that" 

Regular occurance, yes but not yours. I think you need examples of how badly these car parks are managed.

I am sure that there are others on here that will back you up with a supplementary WS to that effect.

It is annoying when the hearing does not reach a conclusion. It happened to me but you will get there or it will be discontinued.   

houndsoflove

Looks like we will be going again as today received notification that a new date has been assigned for just after New Year.  Hopefully I can start 2022 with a positive outcome and continue the celebrations for a bit longer 🤞🏻😃

Coupon-mad

So do a supplementary WS with anything you wish to add, such as clarifying that the crossed out date is in fact evidence that the broken machines were a regular occurrence and the Claimant made complying impossible on more than one occasion, so you kept that piece of card in good faith ready to use each time their system failed.

You should also update your costs assessment to include your loss of salary, earnings or leave for TWO hearings and I would add as evidence (if you did not already have it) Sir Greg Knight's words in the 2018 debate in the House of Commons about his Bill he championed, when he said that all payment methods not working should be 'a perfect defence'.

houndsoflove

Am I allowed to post ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST, or should that be left to one of the many helpful posters who frequent this board? 😃

Hearing held today in front of DDJ Mitchell.  All a bit of a blur in all honesty as I never said a word, just nodded along as the Judge questioned the claimants representative. In a nutshell said I couldn’t have entered into a contract as there was no facility to pay.  Representative argued that I should have left the car park to which the judge remarked that is not a point of law.  Stated I was presented with two options, leave the land which is what the claimant wound have wanted or park and leave a note explaining the situation which I did.

PPL/DCBL had not presented any counter evidence to show the machines were in working order so didn’t dispute that fact.

Judge raised an interesting point stating PPL could have written asking for the payment that should have been made on the day as a result of the faulty machine but chose not to.  If they had done so and I had refused to pay that then there could be a basis for the claim.

Judgement passed and case dismissed.  Rep asked for leave to appeal but Judge said this was refused, and went onto state it was a bit of a joke the way parking companies send in reps to present cases such as this.  I am assuming this means that PPL/DCBL can not dig this up again in the future for another try?

As I hadn’t said anything, and built myself up for a 2 hour hearing and learning everything, I made a bit of a mess with the costs as I was just shell shocked that I had the verdict I wanted without muttering a word.  I gave up on the costs as I was stumbling around trying to engage brain! 🙈. Not fussed particularly, just glad it is over (hopefully) and can crack on with the rest of the year without this hanging over. 👍🏻

Thank you to all who contributed to the thread and provided support, I am eternally grateful.  I will be a regular visitor now and whilst I will leave the expertise to those who know vastly more than I do, will help wherever I can.

Time for a beer and relax 😃