Napier Parking / Willen Lake Parking Ticket - Court Claim

Coupon-mad

Jake, you know you are misleading a defendant if you tell them to take 'mitigation' to court.  You are leading a lamb to the slaughter.   I hope the OP realises that you are here posting for a parking firm, an ex-clamper set-up whose car parks are traps, rather like Napier traps where they have a ticketer lurking, deliberately setting out to issue immediate tickets and not to manage parking, at all.

It's all about the PCNs with you lot, isn't it?   Luckily, not everyone takes the same view and not everyone is an ex-clamper with that mindset.

No idea how you and your ilk sleep at night, TBH.  Never in a million years would I or anyone I know 'work' for a fundamentally corrupt industry like the parking sector.  One only has to read stuff from Glassdoor.com to know what it's like to work for certain firms, and that's before you even consider what you spend your day doing to people.  You know consumers have committed suicide due to your industry?

Umkomaas

JB111 said:

rather than applying a scatter gun approach in the hope that one sticks.

Well that's a bit rich based on your (company's and others') mega-page WS quoting anything and everything (often including the laughable, desperate, Elliot v Loake) that looks 'legal' in the hope the Defendant will melt and capitulate as a consequence of the deluge of 'legal cases' slung at them. Despicable ..... and so hypocritical. 

nosferatu1001

JB111 said:

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.

Oh  my
Your hypocrisy is hilarious
Your "witness" statements, with the doctored unlawful statement of truth, that rarely get the even the basic facts right, full of legal arguments absent from the particulars, and misleading citations from various cases. 

They're the definition of scattergun! 

You're breaking rules because you're posting as a company rep. You don't declare that. Your very first post gave a bit of a clue. Or was that another inaccurate statement from you, much like your error riddled not-witness witness statement?

bye bye VCS. You won't be missed. Just another parasite that is being squashed. 

D_P_Dance

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.

You may well have paid to park, but if the contract, i.e. the sign,  is misleading or contains unfair T&C, it may well be found by a judge to invalid. 

The other day I parked in a Morrisons.  The sign was eight foot up and the T&C were in minute print in a pale pink colour.  They were impossible to read without  binoculars. 

Umkomaas

They were impossible to read without  binoculars. 

Or even to recognise the colour!  👓 

in a pale oink colour.

🐷 

D_P_Dance

Sorry, I have just been watching Peppa Pig with my grandchildren.  

Umkomaas

D_P_Dance said:

Sorry, I have just been watching Peppa Pig with my grandchildren.  

You're excused then; more mind-numbing than two bottles of the Nun!

[Deleted User]

Hi all! Thanks again for all of your advice and assistance - I couldn't be doing this without you!

I submitted the N180 form as advised on the Newbies Post, and I've just received my letter of 'Notice of Transfer of Proceedings.' In the meantime, I've also received a letter of BW Legal offering a lower 'without prejudice' amount of 180 (from 240). They have also attached pictures showing my car parked 2mins after the grace period expired (very frustrating), and that this shows that I failed to follow the Terms and Conditions of the car park. My intention is to reject this offer stating that this would be the maximum I would pay if I lost in court given that 60 of the additional costs can be written off. Would you recommend I do this, state otherwise, or ignore it?

Thanks as always!

nosferatu1001

I'd ignore it, or respond with a drop,hands offer, as you know you have a strong defence and this limits their costs as they won't have to pay a hearing fee nor your costs. 

Coupon-mad

This is a normal letter that everyone ignores.