HELP! To Court for PCN

flashludders

Hello,

I have read the Newbies thread and followed it to the letter; thanks to everyone for the great advice!

My appeals to the landowner and PPC did not work, but determined not to pay, I have reached the stage of having just sent my N180 Directions Questionnaire to the CCBC and the Claimant’s solicitors.

Ultimately my defence is weak and simply is me saying “I paid for a ticket {in May 19}, therefore your PDT Machine/records are wrong” and the PPC saying I didn’t. They have ANPR photos and I presume PDT Machine records (they are refusing to show me those under the SAR).

I did pay for the ticket but have no evidence; what do I do?

I’m assuming that the Claimant’s solicitor will go through with the Court appearance as it is at nil-cost due to a COVID telephone hearing? 

D_P_Dance

Ultimately my defence is weak and simply is me saying “I paid for a ticket {in May 19}, therefore your PDT Machine/records are wrong” 

Hardly weak imo.  Remember the judge has probably come across many many claims from PPCs who do nor maintain machines.  A machine which takes your money, but does not issue a ticket   may be something that Trading Standards should know about.

Le_Kirk

It will have cost them £25 filing fee and they will have to pay (or may already have paid depending on date of hearing) a hearing fee and they may have to fork out up to £50 in legal costs.  It is for the claimant to PROVE their case.  If they have refused to disclose your data under SAR you report them to the ICO provided you are convinced you put the correct VRM into the PDT.

Umkomaas

I’m assuming that the Claimant’s solicitor will go through with the Court appearance as it is at nil-cost due to a COVID telephone hearing? 

Apart from travel costs, it will likely cost the PPC the same for the solicitor to be sitting at his desk doing a phone call, as it would for him to be appearing at your local county court. Solicitors are not noted for altruism!

Which PPC?

Redx

As above , it's definitely NOT at nil cost to them , they will have paid out at least £53 in fees plus letters , administration costs etc , plus the cost of a lawyer on their end of any call , especially if it's a third party lawyer

Which parking company ?  Which solicitors ?

If your defence has already been submitted and you are at the DQ stage , what advice do you need ? 

Nothing else will happen for months , probably next summer before any WS plus Exhibits plus summary costs assessment , or hearing

If they are refusing to give PDT machine data then it could be a simple keying error or a machine error , so could be human error on VRM details keyed in (very common error and well known) or a machine error (again very common)

The fact that a ticket was paid for doesn't mean the correct VRM was entered , the PPC match up the anpr to the VRM keyed in , if it doesn't match they issue a PCN

What does your paid for ticket (evidence) say ?

If you haven't got the ticket , then read this from 3 years ago

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/team-blog/2017/05/throwing-pay-display-ticket-away-use-cost-100/

flashludders

Umkomaas said:

I’m assuming that the Claimant’s solicitor will go through with the Court appearance as it is at nil-cost due to a COVID telephone hearing? 

Apart from travel costs, it will likely cost the PPC the same for the solicitor to be sitting at his desk doing a phone call, as it would for him to be appearing at your local county court. Solicitors are not noted for altruism!

Which PPC?

Thanks! 

It is Premier Park Ltd and BWLegal....

flashludders

Redx said:

As above , it's definitely NOT at nil cost to them , they will have paid out at least £53 in fees plus letters , administration costs etc , plus the cost of a lawyer on their end of any call , especially if it's a third party lawyer

Which parking company ?  Which solicitors ?

If your defence has already been submitted and you are at the DQ stage , what advice do you need ? 

Nothing else will happen for months , probably next summer before any WS plus Exhibits plus summary costs assessment , or hearing

If they are refusing to give PDT machine data then it could be a simple keying error or a machine error , so could be human error on VRM details keyed in (very common error and well known) or a machine error (again very common)

The fact that a ticket was paid for doesn't mean the correct VRM was entered , the PPC match up the anpr to the VRM keyed in , if it doesn't match they issue a PCN

What does your paid for ticket (evidence) say ?

If you haven't got the ticket , then read this from 3 years ago.

Thanks all for replying!

Sadly I don’t have the ticket :-(

It is Premier Park Ltd and BWLegal.

The advice I’m looking for is whether that claiming the PDT Machine is at fault is a viable, case winning argument, whether there is any precedent of this being used successfully by a Defendant, and how to word it in the Witness Statement. 

Redx

its definitely viable , but only a judge can decide if its a case winning point , its called Judge Bingo, all depends on various factors and evidence etc, if a judge believes the defendant or not , too many variables for case winning points

of course its been used by defendants , many times , so find winning cases on here and read them , must be dozens of cases this year alone, plus pdt errors are a common theme in many cases that are not residential cases but are pay and display car parks

I have probably seen almost every point known to man brought up over the years I have attended this forum on an almost daily basis

your search box is the same as mine on here

flashludders

Redx said:

its definitely viable , but only a judge can decide if its a case winning point , its called Judge Bingo, all depends on various factors and evidence etc, if a judge believes the defendant or not , too many variables for case winning points

of course its been used by defendants , many times , so find winning cases on here and read them , must be dozens of cases this year alone, plus pdt errors are a common theme in many cases that are not residential cases but are pay and display car parks

I have probably seen almost every point known to man brought up over the years I have attended this forum on an almost daily basis

your search box is the same as mine on here

Thanks, that makes me feel a bit more confident! I’ll do some more research.

Coupon-mad

The advice I’m looking for is whether that claiming the PDT Machine is at fault is a viable, case winning argument, whether there is any precedent of this being used successfully by a Defendant.

Very often.  We've seen loads.  Court cases at small claims level don't create a precedent though:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2016/10/peel-centre-machine-failure-transcript.html

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2016/09/excel-parking-get-gladstonedby-bw-legal.html

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2016/10/parkingeye-lose-in-court-unsolved.html

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2017/02/excel-lose-peel-centre-casemotorist-not.html

D_P_Dance

Most judges are not fools, (although a very few may be), they know the score.  Put your faith in the golden thread of British justice and complain to your MP and Trading Standards.