DCBLegal/CCPC County Court

Coupon-mad

The handwritten note lived in my car for about 6-12 months, and was for when I parked at work. I don't think I ever removed it in that time period.

Ah, then your WS must say that (otherwise the Judge will think what I thought) and explain that this note doesn't assist you to pinpoint either who put of the family parked the car on that occasion, nor where the car was stopped within what is indisputably partly Local Authority public highway.

Oh, what about lack of consideration period/breach of the Code of Practice? Any grounds to add that? Are any of those incident photos only taken across two minutes? Worth a look as the Code requires a MINIMUM five minutes to allow a driver to read signs and obtain a permit if applicable. There is always a consideration period, even in places purportedly marked ' no parking' because you can't breach a contract a consumer has had no fair opportunity to read and either accept or reject.

FineFighter

Hi C-m, 
Thank you for your valuable suggestions. Sadly, looking at the plethora of photographs, they're all in time order and show one photograph taken 10-15 mins or so before the others, so think the lack of consideration period is probably a bust. 

I've done another draft - I've removed the photos showing my car and replaced them with another photo I took and a screen grab from Google maps. I've made a few changes to the WS itself - mainly Paragraph 6 and 7, Paragraph 24, and Paragraph 33.

I'm grateful for any advice or help anyone can offer. The deadline to get this in is 4pm tomorrow (22nd of July)
https://www.dropbox.com/s/onaefjtm0peph3m/Witness Statement Draft REDACTED Draft 2.pdf?dl=0

Coupon-mad

Sadly, looking at the plethora of photographs, they're all in time order and show one photograph taken 10-15 mins or so before the others,

That's very convenient for them (and unusual...some might say, highly unlikely) but this sort of thing is almost impossible to prove without background pedestrians or cars in the same place, so there's nothing you can say on that front:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3229165/amp/Is-PROOF-private-parking-firms-scamming-motorists-Drivers-say-timings-photos-doctored-legally-parked-cars-issued-fines.html

FineFighter

Hi all, 
sorry to spam the board, just been looking through the WS one final time before work. Grateful if anyone can offer any feedback, particularly to the new sections I added this morning (Paragraphs 8 and 23), as well as the other paragraphs I amended myself yesterday (Paragraphs 6 and 7, Paragraph [now] 26 and Paragraph [now] 35) - now by virtue of the new paragraphs at 8 and 23.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/mj7ey5jvet0wvn6/Witness Statement FINAL REDACTED.pdf?dl=0

Would also be grateful for thoughts on section 35 - re costs.

Many thanks to everyone for all your help and support

aa92

FineFighter said:

Hi all, 
sorry to spam the board, just been looking through the WS one final time before work. Grateful if anyone can offer any feedback, particularly to the new sections I added this morning (Paragraphs 8 and 23), as well as the other paragraphs I amended myself yesterday (Paragraphs 6 and 7, Paragraph [now] 26 and Paragraph [now] 35) - now by virtue of the new paragraphs at 8 and 23.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/mj7ey5jvet0wvn6/Witness Statement FINAL REDACTED.pdf?dl=0

Would also be grateful for thoughts on section 35 - re costs.

Many thanks to everyone for all your help and support

You should remove your name from page 7 of that document you've shared 

FineFighter

Thank you for the heads up, have redacted and reuploaded

https://www.dropbox.com/s/maiboxqeizfnd8s/Witness%20Statement%20FINAL%20REDACTED.pdf?dl=0

FineFighter

Hi all, 
preparing for the court hearing on Thursday and will call tomorrow morning to check judge allocated and going ahead. They seem to have lost my email requesting both cases be merged together so have decided I’d rather just crack on

practical question - do I need to print copies of notes to give to the judge and the claimant? Or is the fact that I’ve emailed in advance meant that’s not necessary? 

The hearing is at 10 but I’m aiming to get there 30-45 mins early to clear security and make sure I don’t go late or get lost. 

Any other tips or advice from people who’ve been there before?

bit nervous but I feel I have a good case and I plan to put terry towel on the spot with regards to his companies and how I can have a debt to a company that was formed 3 years later….

Le_Kirk

If you have sent witness statement and evidence (costs assessments) already to the court and claimant there is no need to take extra copies, except one for yourself.  You could raise it as a preliminary point that the court have lost your e-mail, here is a copy, can the claims both be heard together.  Of course the judge won't have the papers and the claimant will complain and the judge may adjourn!

FineFighter

Hi team, 

Thank you for all your help and support so far - means the world to a panicky internet stranger like me. 

Had my first (of 2) cases today - sadly the one for the higher amount, I say sadly because I lost. I had a bad experience with the judge who I think had made her mind up before I’d even opened my mouth and not helped by I think me managing to !!!!!! her off - firstly by correcting her when she called me Mr (and I pointed out its Dr) and then secondly when I kept pressing the point about POFA - which she didn’t at all agree with. 

I was at the central London county court and it was a bit of a nightmare navigating and finding the correct court. I was one of 2 cases scheduled for the same time, so I waited around til 11 for the case to be heard, and then the judge read through everything for 30 mins and called us in. She had a differently paginated bundle from the claimant, that hadn’t been provided to me, and she basically didn’t consider any of my evidence. 

Her view was that I was being disingenuous by not remembering who the driver was on 3 random occasions, and seemed incredulous I didn’t recall getting the windshield PCNs, therefore it must’ve been me?!

She also felt the fact that pofa wasn’t applicable here, and I maybe spent a bit too long arguing this, which wasn’t winning her favour, but it was a core part of my defence…

She had no sympathy as to whether there was a landowner contract or was it valid, or whether this was or was not partly local authority land, arguing that this would be for the landowner to take up with the PPC If this were the case, and none of my business. 

She did disallow the £70 add-ons so at least that was £210 less, and she only allowed 2 percent interest (and calculated this as £7). 

Annoyingly she also ordered me to pay half the costs of the person attending (they asked for £180) and when I argued that she had disallowed part of their claim, she awarded £90. Apparently on the basis of my “disingenuous arguments” and the fact they had to bring a claim, even when I pointed out I had engaged in the process from LBA and the court process itself.

(I think I got her ire because she asked if I had gotten the NtKs and in my flustered state, I said I had, had googled and thought it was a scam - and pointed out many of us have done things we weren’t proud of 5 years ago!)

I asked for permission to appeal, which was denied, but I’m still considering because it all seems to grossly unfair and unjust. On one hand, I’m happy I at least got it reduced, but I’m very unhappy at being deemed “disingenuous” and not getting a fair hearing. I’m considering using one of the legal firms who seem to have good ratings and outsourcing some of the grief, but think I need a few days to think it through and cool off a bit (and decide whether risking £129 and further costs is worthwhile!)

The new guidance from the parking industry can’t come soon enough in my opinion!

(And the judge refused to even hear this bit too…..)

Coupon-mad

Bad luck with DJ Lottery - we feel for you. She obviously formed the opinion you were the driver and could then ignore POFA.

Trouble is with that, it's her decision and she's entitled to decide she thinks you were driving, on the balance of probabilities. And that's not appealable.

I think @bargepole might have come up against that frosty-faced London Judge before. Did you get her name?

Hope you get a more reasonable Judge next time and you certainly cost them more than you will pay! Count yourself lucky the other one wasn't merged after all. There are always positives in life!

You will also be a great contributor to the Public Consultation after what this rogue industry has put you through.