Napier Parking / Willen Lake Parking Ticket - Court Claim

Redx

correct, read the second post of the newbies thread for why

KeithP

PizzaHutBuffet said:

I've had a couple of threads regarding the DQ - is my understanding correct that I should say no to mediation? 

Just follow the guidance in Bargepole's 'what happens when' post linked from the second post of the NEWBIES thread.

Everything you want to know has already been asked and the answers are in that NEWBIES thread.
Please look there first.

nosferatu1001

As above
If you have a question - check the newbies.  Every single time. 

Coupon-mad

PizzaHutBuffet said:

Hi all, thank you for coming back to me so quickly. I really appreciate it, and I apologise for the amateurish way I have gone about things so far. Admittedly there was a bit of panic when I received the Claim Form from the CCBC, and just wanted it responded to. If I've irretrievably screwed this for myself, do let me know.

Le_Kirk is right in that I responded to the claim online on MCOL. I responded in the 'Defence' box. Apologies in advance for this, but here is the 'defence'..

Paid for parking - barely late due to injury of a
friend playing football at local pitch - actually walked past
parking attendant who had specifically checked on my car and was
walking away from car park. Egregious fine amount. Dispute that Napier require
compensating £100.

OMG that isn't a defence.  You don't even mention signage or anything, so this is likely to be lost in court IMHO.  So sorry.

[Deleted User]

Thanks all and thanks @Coupon-mad for the honest assessment. I feared that I'd made a huge mistake.

In this case, what do you think my next move should be? Do you think I should:

- pay the money asked and be done with it

- complete the DQ and wait to see if they cancel the court case nearer the time (from what's said, I suspect they'll go through with it and I'll be an example case on their website!)
- try to lower the amount I have to pay. They're currently asking for 240.06. This includes the 100 fine, statutory interest rise of 5.06, 60 recovery costs, 25 court fee and 50 legal representative's costs.

Or is there another option I haven't considered?

Many thanks in advance.

Redx

Even if you lost in Court you can object to the additional charges of £60 , thereby lowering the total to below £200

A without prejudice offer may be accepted if you negotiate with the claimant , in comparison a parking eye claim is £175 in total , no added extra charges

Even with a top notch defence you could lose , but it's almost guaranteed with the one now on file

Coupon-mad

If you qualify for help with court fees (low income) then apply to amend your defence (N244) otherwise it costs £100 court fee.

Other than that, carry on, do a decent witness statement and evidence in due course and hope they discontinue.  And you can at least remove the £60 if you know how to argue that properly even when the other side misstates the effect of the Britannia v Semark-Jullien case.

JB111

I am unsure why signage would be raised as a Defence. There is an admission that he paid for a ticket and therefore he would have been aware as to the signage and its terms. The question here is whether he is liable to a charge in light of the unfortunate events (assisting his injured friend) which has made him late to the return of his vehicle. Therefore his Defence should be based on this genuine point alone (which there is some prospect) rather than applying a scatter gun approach in the hope that one sticks.

nosferatu1001

Ah Jake, you're trying to opine on something you're not a witness to? Not a shock, we've seen your prolix statements ad nauseum....

As you well know - and are misleading the op here - just because you pay for a ticket doesn't mean all the signage t and c were at the machine. Your own "managed" car parks are great examples if this, all over. 

Your "assistance " as a serial loser in court - more than any other claimant company - is not needed, 

op - be aware of the identity of this poster - who is breaking forum rules. Take their advice with a pinch of salt - or head on over to basically any excel or VCS thread where you can laugh at their pathetic litigation. 

JB111

nosferatu1001 said:

Ah Jake, you're trying to opine on something you're not a witness to? Not a shock, we've seen your prolix statements ad nauseum....

As you well know - and are misleading the op here - just because you pay for a ticket doesn't mean all the signage t and c were at the machine. Your own "managed" car parks are great examples if this, all over. 

Your "assistance " as a serial loser in court - more than any other claimant company - is not needed, 

op - be aware of the identity of this poster - who is breaking forum rules. Take their advice with a pinch of salt - or head on over to basically any excel or VCS thread where you can laugh at their pathetic litigation. 

Is this not the case for everyone posting a comment? Breaking forum rules...? I am an individual offering a constructive point which is that this motorist has a genuine Defence and this should not be overshadowed with points that are irrelevant.

I suggest you follow your own advice and take this post with a 'pinch of salt'.

Have a great weekend.