County Court Claim - NCP Parking outstayed by 20 mins

Coupon-mad

If you have their WS, are you SURE there is 'nothing' by way of a landowner agreement in evidence?  That can't be right.

Monseymoo

@Coupon-mad I have their Land Registry document just looking now tbh I dont know if this means they do have permission or not?  Thoughts Ive copied the main paragraphs below:

2 - Short particulars of the leas(s) or under-lease(s) under which the land is held:
Date - 3rd Dec 1997
Term - From March 1996 to Dec 2022
Rent - As therein mentioned
Parties - (1) Akenhurst Limited (2) National Car Parks Limited
Note - The lease contains provisions as to determination upon the terms as therein mentioned
3 - There are excepted from the effect of registration all estates, rights, interests, powers and remedies arising upon, or by reason of, any dealing made in breach of the prohibition or restriction against dealings therewith inter vivos contained in the Lease.
4 - The landlords title is registered
5 - Unless otherwise mentioned the title includes any legal easements granted by the registered lease(s) bu is subject to any rights that it reserves, so far as those easements and rights exist and benefit or affect the registered land

Coupon-mad

Remove the entire point then because NCP lease the site and therefore they are the landholders, themselves.

Monseymoo

@Coupon-mad ahhh ok thanks head slap sorry!
Does the legitimate interest part still hold value would adding in a bullet with something like:

19.  The Claimant has no legitimate interest to enforce this charge, the charge is disproportionate.

Coupon-mad

Not like that, no!  I told you how to argue that there is no legitimate interest and you certainly CANNOT use anything saying it is 'disproportionate' (Beavis case killed that).

Monseymoo

@Coupon-mad ok ive removed it all my WS now is as follows, I'll be looking to submit at around 3pm as have until 4pm today so any last feedback would be appreciated:

1. I am xxx xxx of xxxxx, xxxxx, xxxxxx the Defendant in this matter. I will say as follows:

2. On 26th January 2020, I parked my vehicle registration No. xxxxxx in the NCP car park at Bournemouth Terrace Road, Bournemouth, BH2 5NN.

3. I purchased a ticket using the paybyphone app on my mobile for 1 hour of parking starting at 11.10am.

4. I entered the local town from the car park and carried out some shopping, around 55 minutes later I returned to my vehicle.  Upon entering my vehicle and opening my bag I realised that my purse was not in my bag.  Understandably concerned I first went through my vehicle floor to see if it had fallen out of my bag.  Upon not finding my purse I then began to retrace my steps from the car park back into the Primark shopping center lift shopping store at address :

Primark

48 - 54 Commercial Road

Bournemouth

United Kingdom

BH2 5LR

During this time I carefully was checking the ground in case the purse had fallen out.  It’s worth noting that on the day in question the weather was bad with heavy rain and strong winds, trying to look on the ground retracing my steps for my purse in such conditions added time.  I approached the security guard in the entrance of the store and asked if a purse had been handed in, I was asked to go to customer services where a purse had been recorded.  Given it was a busy Sunday and the store is incredibly big (SH01 - showing size of the store and regular queues) I then made my way upstairs to the customer services area where I had to queue for around 10 minutes.  I was then asked to identify personal items in the purse to validate my identify which I did, I then returned back to my vehicle using the lift up into the car park.  

5. I got into my vehicle extremely grateful but understandably distressed following the concern over the potential loss of money and personal items within my purse.  The car park at the time of returning was very busy given it was peak shopping time on a Sunday.  There is only one entrance and exit to the car park meaning people can often queue to leave especially if people are in the middle of parking.  On the day in question it took a considerable time to leave the car park given the amount of people parking which is evident by the Claimants records showing the parking phone payments made.  It’s additionally important to note that this car park is in the centre of town and has a much smaller number of spaces to other car parks in the town as such it is regularly busy and often a customer will have to wait for spaces as people leave.

6.  I enclose photographs of the car park (SH02) to show the limited space for people waiting for spaces as people exit and the single exit which will hopefully illustrate on a busy day how this would lead to delays in exiting the car park.  Due to all these factors this added to time in me leaving the car park as photographed at 12.31pm.

7.  Purchasing another ticket after losing my purse was at the time the last thing I was considering given the immediate panic and distress I was under. 

 

8. I have included evidence of my purchased ticket in the car park (SH03).

9. I have contacted Primark to ask for any evidence of the property being handed in however have been advised that all property logs are destroyed after 3 months.

9.  I have considered the Code of Practice ("CoP") of the British Parking Association ("BPA"), of which the Claimant is an accredited member. A copy of paragraph 13 of the CoP, which relates to grace periods. In order to be an accredited member of the BPA, compliance with the CoP is compulsory.  The significance of being a member of the BPA and subscribing to its CoP is that the Claimant is only entitled to ask the DVLA for the details of a car’s registered keeper if it is a member (so without membership a private parking company would not be able to function without the ability to trace drivers/registered keepers).

10. Paragraph 13 of the CoP version 8 (current at the time of my parking) clearly states that a grace period is to be applied to parking. The CoP makes clear that such grace periods are to be applied both at the start of any parking period and also at the end of any parking period. The whole point of these grace periods is to allow drivers time to find a parking space and to read the signage prior to commencement of the period of parking, and time to exit the carpark once they have finished parking. Grace periods are not defined, but the CoP requires them to be "at least 10 minutes" (paragraphs 13.3). It is worthy of note that the recommendation is a minimum of 10 minutes, not a maximum. 

 

11. In the Witness Statement from the Claimant dated 2nd June 2021, paragraph 21 states

“Pursuant to the paragraph 13.3 Code of Practice, the grace period allowed for up to 10 minutes for the Defendant to vacate the Car Park”

This is not accurate I have added below the actual wording from the Code of Practice as below from section 13.3:

“13.3 Where a parking location is one where a limited period of parking is permitted, or where drivers contract to park for a defined period and pay for that service in advance (Pay & Display), this would be considered as a parking event and a Grace Period of at least 10 minutes must be added to the end of a parking event before you issue a PCN.”

This clearly shows that a driver should be given ‘at least’ and not ‘up to’ 10 minutes at the end of any car parking paid to leave the car park not a minimum as stated by the Claimant.

 

12. Additionally in paragraph 46 of the Witness Statement from the Claimant it states that I overstayed my parking by 24 minutes.  The parking was purchased at 11.10am therefore the overstay was actually 21 minutes not 24 putting more inaccuracy to the claim made against me.

 

13.  I have conducted further research into the Claimant and their associates which has revealed that they are pursuing claims like these on an industrial scale using intimidation tactics and threatening court action to force people in to paying charges for which they are not necessarily lawfully liable. They have abused the courts, and threats of using the courts, as a cheap form of 'debt' collection and acquiring default CCJ's, in the knowledge and hope that many people would not have the determination to fight through the many threats.

 

14. The Claimant’s threats strongly imply that if I did not pay immediately then a CCJ was inevitable and that it would destroy my ability to borrow money and destroy my career prospects. There were many times I felt like giving in to the Claimant’s demands despite strongly believing I do not owe the money demanded.

 

15. Furthermore the extra charges are an abuse of process, I refer you to the case of G4QZ465V Excel v Wilkinson whereby it was ruled that given the costs of recovery are built into the parking charge as a cost of operating the scheme, this is a double recovery or an attempt by the claimant to try to add in an additional charge.

 

16. The fine listed on the PCN charge £100 and yet the claimant is attempting to recover £175.24 (plus £25 court fees and £50 legal representative's costs) a difference of £72.24.

 

17. The fact that the Claimant has inflated its Claim in the face of court action further increases the suggestion that it is reliant on individuals not defending themselves and abusing the courts in order to obtain default CCJs.

 

18.  Having made recent contact with BW Legal they have refused to see reason for the unfortunate circumstances and that additional reasonable grace periods of time in such circumstances should be provided.

19. The Court is invited to dismiss the claim and to award my costs of dealing with this claim and attendance at the hearing, such as are allowable pursuant to CPR 27.14 (SH04 - summary of costs assessment).

I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

Included in this Witness Statement are Exhibits references above in the relevant paragraphs and are summarised as follows:

·       SH01 – Photo of the Primark store where the purse had been located showing the size of store leading to time delays in obtaining the purse at Customer Services

·       SH02 – Photo of the car park showing limited space for waiting customers and single exit for all vehicles

·       SH03 – Evidence of the payment to the NCP car park on the 26th January 2021

·       SH04 – Summary of Costs Assessment

Coupon-mad

But I didn't tell you not to talk about the lack of legitimate interest...

Monseymoo

@Coupon-mad I know sorry I just don't know what to say or how to word it, would the below be a suitable paragraph on legitimate interest:

With no 'legitimate interest' excuse for charging this unconscionable sum given the above facts, this Claimant is fully aware that their claim is reduced to an unrecoverable penalty and must fail. The Beavis case confirmed that the penalty rule is certainly engaged in any case of a private parking charge and was only disengaged due to the unique circumstances of that case, which do not resemble this claim.

Coupon-mad

No, I told you how to argue it when I first mentioned it on the last page.

Monseymoo

@Coupon-mad sorry I'm re-reading what you posted:

You should talk about there being no legitimate interest in pursuing a genuine customer under these circumstances. 'legit interest' is what carried the Beavis case through.

What exactly should I be putting something like this?  Sorry I'm struggling to know how to word it

There is no legitimate interest for the Claimant to pursue a genuine customer under these circumstances.