Parking fine!!!

Ben255

Ben255 said:

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/hup4t4c69dhepeaqajobx/gggggg.docx?dl=0&rlkey=5oi4ttt6m2f9c8vt32v57szfe

That's the complete document if anybody would like to read it in its entirety 

Ben255

Coupon-mad said:

I think I'd add into #12 the transcript of the ParkingEye case where 31 minutes trying to park in a beach car park in Newquay was deemed not having entered into a contract, because your case (31 minutes trying to pay in a National Trust visitor centre car park) is on all fours with that situation as both are a 'frustration of contract' after which the driver gave up and left the site.  It's one of the links here:

http://www.parking-prankster.com/case-law.html


And add here the bit shown in bold (plus there's a typo of 'queue'):

However, this is in a separate area of the site and was not visible on my entry or along the route to where I subsequently parked).   Also, there was no arrow at the machine I tried to use, to tell people that there was another machine elsewhere that could be used in the event of the first machine being full or faulty.  It would be simple for a parking firm to do this, to direct people to the nearest alternative machine, especially at a visitor centre where, on busy days, it must be commonplace for coin payments to fill the machine and block it, as appeared to be the case.  Instructions on what to do in order to pay in coins or by card at an alternative machine were completely absent, to the best of my recollection, otherwise we'd have walked to a second machine.  We waited for approximately 5 minutes before we got to the front of the que queue.

Thanks! I will add it now and amend my typo. You guys are ace

Ben255

To whom do I email my WS and exhibits? The N180 was sent to the CCBC email address but the case has now moved from Northampton to Swindon county court. The correspondence I have recived through the post from swindon have no email address. I take it the CCBC inbox is a national address and I should continue sending my correspondence through them?

1505grandad

A heads-up  -  another couple of typos:-

Ariel  -  should be Aerial

Judgement  -  in this context there is no middle "e" as per the document you are exhibiting

Le_Kirk

I had my 2 young children (aged 4 and 7 at the time) with me for the journey and was dropping them off with my parents on en route.

 After climbing the hill, we found the information centre. It was very busy and there was a que queue formed outside.

Plus another que typo later

Around a week later I received a parking charge from the claimant. I immediately replied explaining my reasons for not being able to obtain a ticket. I offered to pay the original parking charge for my short stay via secure bank transfer and requested there their banking details. I informed them I would not be paying there their inflated parking charge as I found it completely unfair and disproportionate.

Arguing it is a disproportionate charge is pointless and went out following the Beavis case.

Le_Kirk

Ben255 said:

To whom do I email my WS and exhibits? The N180 was sent to the CCBC email address but the case has now moved from Northampton to Swindon county court. The correspondence I have received through the post from swindon have no email address. I take it the CCBC inbox is a national address and I should continue sending my correspondence through them?

Your letter from the court (Swindon) should tell you where to file (on the court) and serve (on the claimant) the documents.  Don't forget to send copies to the claimant.  You should be able to fin an e-mail address by using the court finder: -
https://www.gov.uk/find-court-tribunal.  Putting Swindon in, I found this: -
swindon.cty.enq@justice.gov.uk

Fruitcake

The Claimant is Minster Baywatch, but the name on the PDT machines is Bransby Wilson. This machine includes a warning that a parking charge will be issued for non-payment.

In Thornton vs Shoe Lane, the following was noted.

It can be translated into offer and acceptance in this way: the offer is made when the proprietor of the machine holds it out as being ready to receive the money. The acceptance takes place when the customer puts his money into the slot. The terms of the offer are contained in the notice placed on or near the machine stating what is offered for the money. The customer is bound by those terms as long as they are sufficiently brought to his notice before-hand, but not otherwise. He is not bound by the terms printed on the ticket if they differ from the notice, because the ticket comes too late.

In this instance, the proprietor of the machine was Bransby Wilson. The contract to pay for parking was with this company as displayed on the pay machine, and the motorist is bound by those terms. 
The motorist is not bound by the terms printed on the ticket, or displayed elsewhere such as on a different company's signs if they differ from the notice on the pay machine.
The contract offered on the machine even states that a £100 charge will be issued for non-payment. It is reasonable therefore that the motorist would believe they were forming a contract with Bransby Wilson by putting money into a pay machine with that company's name clearly displayed on it, and that is the company who would issue a parking charge for failure to pay.

This is supported by Section 69 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 that states, 

Contract terms that may have different meanings
(1) If a term in a consumer contract, or a consumer notice, could have different meanings, the meaning that is most favourable to the consumer is to prevail.

Minster Baywatch is a stranger to the parking contract stated on the payment machine since they did not offer parking in exchange for payment, and therefore the motorist cannot have formed a contract with them.