Defence - Countrywide Parking Management & BW Legal

Coupon-mad

No-one commenting means no-one agrees and the idea is stupid.

jrhys

Ha fair enough. Any other suggestions?

D_P_Dance

n MP has suggested in the HofC that some of these companies may have links with organised crime.  Do you really want to fund people smuggling and modern slavery?

jrhys

D_P_Dance - I do not want to fund organised crime.

I would like to defend the claim, but have missed the WS deadline and feel under pressure (as is the business plan of these companies) to simply give in.

As I understand them, the reasons for that WS deadline are to:
a. give enough time for all parties to read and respond to the statements (there's no hearing date so no issue here)
b. prevent either party gaining an advantage from being able to respond directly to the other's statement within their own.

As such, maybe I wouldn't be too out of favour in the Judge's eyes if I wrote the WS as if I hadn't seen BWL's and instead addressed their points in the written response I am allowed to enter, due in by 15th April. I expect to be criticised by the DJ anyway for first misinterpreting and then not clarifying the Order.

Le_Kirk

jrhys said:

I would like to defend the claim, but have missed the WS deadline and feel under pressure (as is the business plan of these companies) to simply give in.

As I understand them, the reasons for that WS deadline are to:
a. give enough time for all parties to read and respond to the statements (there's no hearing date so no issue here)
b. prevent either party gaining an advantage from being able to respond directly to the other's statement within their own.

As such, maybe I wouldn't be too out of favour in the Judge's eyes if I wrote the WS as if I hadn't seen BWL's and instead addressed their points in the written response I am allowed to enter, due in by 15th April. I expect to be criticised by the DJ anyway for first misinterpreting and then not clarifying the Order.

Not sure that these two statements compute - if there is not a hearing date, how do you come to know about the WS deadline?

jrhys

Umkomaas said:

jrhys said:

I thought WS were only due 14 days prior to the hearing, the date of which hasn't been set, meaning that I can't have missed a deadline?

Unless a different date is ordered by the court .....

1) Each party must deliver to the other party and to the court office copies of all documents on which that party intends to rely no later than 4pm on 1 April 2021.

Le_Kirk - see Umkomaas' point from p2.

jrhys

Here is a link to BWL's WS.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ijWshQ7y6OJVwu6yvUVU8JwSM6dTTF4J/view?usp=sharing

I have redacted my personal details with red boxes. The (half-hearted) redactions by BWL are the wonky black ones.

Prior to receiving this WS, the lines of my particular defence (aside from any one-size-fits-all approaches) and therefore the contents of my WS, were clear. They do not change as a result of the BWL WS and are:

This place is where I usually parked, and did so for a number of months both during my residency at the block and afterwards (having a full understanding of not only where and how to park considerately, but of the number of cars that use the area).
On that day I parked as usual, for the first time since returning from a Xmas break. I was not on the lookout for parking signs, since there had been none there in my memory. I did not see any signs. This is because there were no signs in a reasonable line of sight from the path I took from entrance to my parking position and out again. BWL did not (and have still failed to) provide me with any evidence that I could have seen any signs from where I parked. If they had, I would most likely have paid the ticket. BWL have shown me close ups of signs with no evidence of their positioning. The claim that there were signs at the entrance is completed contradicted by the photo on the NTK - which clearly shows the entrance pillar with no sign on it.
All of the signs have since been moved - mostly upwards - and are still, imo, unreadable from inside a car. There are still no entrance signs.

SayNoToPCN

Just file it today. One or two days l;ate, given you are quite a long way from the hearing, is unlikely to cause them real harm, and so you should be ok./ Obv cannot g'tee, but DO IT.

Youve wasted another day not doing it becasuse youre asking if you should> Yes. Do it. Today. 
You can knock it out in a couple of hours

Coupon-mad

This goes straight into your WS near the start - it's good!  Just separate it into 2 or 3 paragraphs and refer to the evidence you are attaching (your lease/tenancy agreement or anything else you want to append):

This place is where I usually parked, and did so for a number of months both during my residency at the block and afterwards (having a full understanding of not only where and how to park considerately, but of the number of cars that use the area).
On that day I parked as usual, for the first time since returning from a Xmas break. I was not on the lookout for parking signs, since there had been none there in my memory. I did not see any signs. This is because there were no signs in a reasonable line of sight from the path I took from entrance to my parking position and out again. BWL did not (and have still failed to) provide me with any evidence that I could have seen any signs from where I parked. If they had, I would most likely have paid the ticket. BWL have shown me close ups of signs with no evidence of their positioning. The claim that there were signs at the entrance is completed contradicted by the photo on the NTK - which clearly shows the entrance pillar with no sign on it.
All of the signs have since been moved - mostly upwards - and are still, imo, unreadable from inside a car. There are still no entrance signs.

Then continue by copying a recent WS, like the one by @Nosy which includes mention of Excel v Wilkinson (a transcript you must also append, NOT the Southampton case because one of those was appealed).  It is vital that you cover yourself to explain why parking firms can't add sums on top of an already almost doubled, and enhanced, parking charge.  

Other recent example WS can be found by searching 'discontinuance' which will find recently discontinued cases where people had just filed a WS and won at that stage.

jrhys

I'm struggling to find a recent example WS other than robertcox999's, but that doesn't include the recent Excel v Wilkinson case (Nosy's has been deleted from dropbox - I've sent Nosy a message just in case they are still about).

Any thoughts on the below or on BWL's WS?

The first paragraphs of my WS are:

1.         I am XXX of XXX, and I am the Defendant against whom this claim is made. The facts are true to the best of my belief and my account has been prepared based upon my own knowledge.

2.         In my statement I shall refer to exhibits within the evidence supplied with this statement, referring to page and reference numbers where appropriate. My defence is repeated and I will say as follows:

Sequence of events and signage:

3.         I am familiar with this car park and have used it for many years, both when resident at the adjacent flats and also afterwards, in the knowledge that the area was open to all, unallocated and unrestricted. The place I parked in on the 8th January 2020 was one of the places I usually parked, and did so having a full understanding of where and how to park considerately. I did not restrict access or egress from the parking area nor access to the bin storage opposite.

4.         On that day I parked as usual, for the first time since returning from a Christmas break. I was not on the lookout for parking signs, since there had never been any restrictions there to my knowledge, and I did not see any signs indicating a change to parking allocations or restrictions. I did notice one or two recently spray-painted spaces, which was a sensible way to encourage straighter parking and something I had considered doing when I lived there. By themselves, those lines cannot be considered to be sufficient evidence of formal parking restrictions, nor of any limitations to the parking area – many private residences mark out only a subset of the available spaces to aid parking in tighter areas.

5.         I did not see any signs during my entry to, stay at or exit from the parking area. As such I can only reasonably conclude that there were no such signs. Had there been any clear indications that I was parking in a restricted area, I would not have parked there. The Claimant refers to entrance signage. As seen in the photograph of my vehicle shown on the Notice to Keeper (exhibit XX-01), the enhanced copy of which (XX-02) was provided by the Claimant following a Subject Access Request, there are no such signs on the entrance pillar to the parking area at the date and time in question.

6.         In fact, the Claimant provides no evidence that any signage claimed to be at the site on the 8th January 2020 was visible from any car entering, parking in or exiting the parking area. Any photographs purporting to show such signage on a different date cannot be considered sufficient to evidence their presence on the date in question. Any close-up photographs of signage cannot be considered sufficient as evidence of their visibility from the entrance nor from any areas, like the one in which I parked, that were frequently and considerately used as parking by residents and visitors alike.

Signage and parking area changes

7.         Two weeks following the 8th January 2020, I passed by the site and saw a new entrance sign for the first time. I believe the Claimant intended to have entrance signage up at the site on the day in question, but had not yet erected any, and instead rushed to erect such signage after the fact to attempt to make money from drivers who had no opportunity to learn of any terms on that date.

8.         On 3rd December 2020, I passed by the site again and could not see signage up at the entrance. Exhibits XX-03 and XX-04 are photographs of the entrance to the parking area, taken from inside my car, showing that there is no visible signage upon forwards entry – as was the case on 8th January 2020.

9.         In addition to highlighting the absence of entrance signage, Exhibit XX-03 shows a car parked in a similar position to the one I parked in on 8th January and what appear to be painted parking spaces, demarcating the area in which I parked as a Claimant-approved place to park. This evidences the reasonable and considerate nature of my parking on the date in question. These photographs can also be considered a demonstration of the number and frequency of changes made to the signage in and around the parking area.