Excel Parking ticket, deadline for witness statement is 36 Hours

Ferrybird

Sent you a PM about sending that formatted doc over - check you inbox when you get chance.

Coupon-mad

You know the section on the sign that says 'PARKING CHARGES WILL BE ISSUED FOR THE FOLLOWING'?

Correct me if I am wrong, but the list on the sign - which forums the contract - does not include 'failure to display a ticket' on the windscreen (NOT WINDSHIELD, PLEASE, WE ARE NOT IN THE USA). 

You breached none of the stated terms that give rise to a 'parking charge'.

Fruitcake

Anonymouspro99 said:

Fruitcake said:

No landowner contract.
The one page WS stating they are the lawful occupier is not signed by the landowner, The identity of the landowner is not even stated.
Without this, the scammers have not proof that they have landowner authority to operate on the site.

If you have time, get that in your WS now. If you have already sent it, send a supplementary WS pointing this out.

I’m just about to send it. Will this paragraph be sufficient:

    In the Claimants Leaseholder Witness Statement is not signed by the landowner. It also does not state  who the Landowner is ( whoever it may be). Therefor showing that the claimant has no proof that they have a landowner authority to operate on the Siddals Road Car Park.

I would say something along the lines that the claimant has not provided any proof in their witness statement or at any other time in any documentation in support of their case against you that they have authority from the landowner to issue charges and pursue motorists to court in their own name.
Their WS and Leaseholder WS both refer to a contract from August 2011, but have not provided a copy of that contract to you or the court. You aver therefore that there was no such contract in force at the time of the alleged event.

(I wonder if they have lost their copy)

Then add your comment above. Include the page number of the alleged leaseholder statement within their exhibit number AA??

Hang fire a little longer before sending your WS if possible to give more of the regulars a chance to cast their collective eyes over their evidence.

Snakes_Belly

I agree that the landowner contract looks a bIt dodgy. After checking the postcode on the business rates enquiry site it appears that business rates are being paid on premises and car park. 

Address	Description
Bounce Revolution, Siddals Road, Derby, DE1 2PY	Trampoline park and premises
Hutchison (site No De0006) Holy Trinity Church, London Road, Derby, DE1 2PY	Communication station and premises
Siddals Road Car Par 15 Spaces, Siddals Road, Derby, DE1 2PY	Car park and premises
Siddals Road Car Park 12 Spaces, Siddals Road, Derby, DE1 2PY	Car park and premises
Siddals Road Car Park 2 Spaces, Siddals Road, Derby, DE1 2PY	Car park and premises
Siddals Road Car Park, Siddals Road, Derby, DE1 2PY	Car park and premises
Unit R/o Bounce Revolution, Siddals Road, Derby, DE1 2PY	Warehouse and premises

Fruitcake

You said in your draft WS earlier today that the scammers had provided a redacted contract, but you haven't shown it to us yet have you. We really need to see it exactly as it was sent to you.

You have the year of the alleged event in your WS as 2010. 

Umkomaas

From memory there were some previous issues at Bounce Revolution - I think Excel had some part of the car park and VCS the other. Needs a forum search by the OP, my recollection is hazy and I'm on my mobile (searching is pretty hopeless on that) waiting for Mrs U get some essential shopping!

Anonymouspro99

Fruitcake said:

You said in your draft WS earlier today that the scammers had provided a redacted contract, but you haven't shown it to us yet have you. We really need to see it exactly as it was sent to you.

You have the year of the alleged event in your WS as 2010. 

Hi I attached a file with their witness statement. On the first page and the pictures are the exhibits that they provided. There were some more exhibits but they were just images of the car park half a year before the fine was issued and the charges that they sent me afterwards.

i copied the exemplary witness statement so I don’t think they provided a redacted contract.

im still new so I didn’t really understand half of the points except for the sequence of events.

Fruitcake

Anonymouspro99 said:

Fruitcake said:

You said in your draft WS earlier today that the scammers had provided a redacted contract, but you haven't shown it to us yet have you. We really need to see it exactly as it was sent to you.

You have the year of the alleged event in your WS as 2010. 

Hi I attached a file with their witness statement. On the first page and the pictures are the exhibits that they provided. There were some more exhibits but they were just images of the car park half a year before the fine was issued and the charges that they sent me afterwards.

i copied the exemplary witness statement so I don’t think they provided a redacted contract.

im still new so I didn’t really understand half of the points except for the sequence of events.

It is not a fine. Do not use the F word either on here or in any correspondence as otherwise it gives an air of legitimacy to the scamvoice.

I still don't think you have told us the correct date of the alleged contravention yet. This must be correct on your WS.

You specifically mentioned a redacted contract in your WS. If they did not provide you with a copy of the contract then that section needs to be removed because it is not true.
If they did supply a contract then we need to see it.

I do not believe the scammers mentioned the date of the alleged contravention in their WS (although I may have missed it). They refer to the exhibits which includes photos of random cars on random dates, but the WS does not specifically say which car caused the alleged contravention or on which date.
Did the WS include copies of the NTK? Without that, or reference to it, there seems to be nothing linking the WS to their claim.

How can the paralegal who signed the WS as a statement of truth actually do that if they don't know when the alleged event occurred.

Anonymouspro99

Fruitcake said:

Anonymouspro99 said:

Fruitcake said:

You said in your draft WS earlier today that the scammers had provided a redacted contract, but you haven't shown it to us yet have you. We really need to see it exactly as it was sent to you.

You have the year of the alleged event in your WS as 2010. 

Hi I attached a file with their witness statement. On the first page and the pictures are the exhibits that they provided. There were some more exhibits but they were just images of the car park half a year before the fine was issued and the charges that they sent me afterwards.

i copied the exemplary witness statement so I don’t think they provided a redacted contract.

im still new so I didn’t really understand half of the points except for the sequence of events.

It is not a fine. Do not use the F word either on here or in any correspondence as otherwise it gives an air of legitimacy to the scamvoice.

I still don't think you have told us the correct date of the alleged contravention yet. This must be correct on your WS.

You specifically mentioned a redacted contract in your WS. If they did not provide you with a copy of the contract then that section needs to be removed because it is not true.
If they did supply a contract then we need to see it.

I do not believe the scammers mentioned the date of the alleged contravention in their WS (although I may have missed it). They refer to the exhibits which includes photos of random cars on random dates, but the WS does not specifically say which car caused the alleged contravention or on which date.
Did the WS include copies of the NTK? Without that, or reference to it, there seems to be nothing linking the WS to their claim.

How can the paralegal who signed the WS as a statement of truth actually do that if they don't know when the alleged event occurred.

Hi they did send images of my car on the date 20/11/2019 and the time which was 13:27. Arrow did 1 and a half hours after I parked my car. The reason why I didn’t send the pictures was due to the fact that my reg number was included.

they sent a NTK on the 22/11/2019.
but I didn’t include them as the name was on the pages and so was my reg number.

Anonymouspro99

Fruitcake said:

You said in your draft WS earlier today that the scammers had provided a redacted contract, but you haven't shown it to us yet have you. We really need to see it exactly as it was sent to you.

You have the year of the alleged event in your WS as 2010. 

Yh I changed the event to 2019 sorry for the mistake