Ccj and defence

Fruitcake

shortysky said:

Umkomaas said:

But no matter when I take them it will have the background light from the street light at the front of the main road! 

That's not a problem as that would (presumably) have been working at the time. What you don't want to do is to add flash to it and light the whole place up like a Christmas tree. 

Do you have a friend perhaps who might be able to do this for you, given you have your little one to care for - first priority always! 🙂

Yes will have to see if anyone’s willing to help me out. Do I take the pictures close up or standing away from them? 

 
Follow the route you took on the date in question with photos taken far enough away that the entrance, one way system, and exit can be seen, as well as the (poor) placement of signs. According to GCV, there were signs on the right (driver's side) as you drive through, but they had been removed in GSV images from 2018. 
The cynic in me says this was a deliberate act to remove signs a driver was likely to see, and leave only the ones on the passenger side that would be hidden by other parked vehicles.

If this is still the case, make sure you get photos of the (now) missing signs. Photos of signs and the PDT machine hidden behind cars will be a bonus.
Get close ups of the signs as well to see what they actually say.
The earlier signs say Starpark, which is a trading name of CEL. It could be argued that this is a different company, so CEL are not the company named on the signs, therefore they cannot form a contract with the driver. IT's important to see what scammer's name is now on the signs.

shortysky

Fruitcake said:

shortysky said:

Fruitcake said:

Pease will you confirm two things. In a previous post, you said the car was parked where you were standing in the last photo of that post.
I think this was directly outside and adjacent to Pizza Express in the same position as the white car in this photo.



Is this correct, and do the scammers have photos of the car parked in that position?

Hi yes I was in the same space as the white car, I’m not sure if they have pictures of me parked, as they didn’t even have pictures on the letter of me entering and leaving. As I’ve seen other from CEL with the picture of the car on them? So I did ask for them pictures to when I sent the SAR email before. If the camera just clocks people going in and out then I’m not sure they have pictures of me parked. Will have to wait till I receive the email. If I knew about the ticket with a window screen notice, I could of got all this evidence off my dash cam. But it had overwritten it all by time I knew about it. 

Good. The NTK and other correspondence from CEL says the alleged event occurred on Land at 34 - 38 Woodford Road, Bramhall, SK7 1PA.
The address of that particular Pizza Express is number 32 Woodford Road, Bramhall, SK7 1PA.
If the car was parked alongside that particular Pizza Express, then it was not parked on land at numbers 34 - 38. The shop to the left of the pizzeria is number 34. Numbers 34 - 38 are the three shops between the pizza place and the bank where the large white van is parked.
This may be why you have not been shown an image of the car actually parked, because it would prove that your car was outside their scam zone.

Depending on whether or not the scammers provide a photo of the car whilst parked, you will be able to state one of two things at the WS stage.
Either,
They will produce a photo' showing the car was not parked where the scammers said it was, and was not parked within the land specified on the initial NTK,
Or, 
They will not produce a photo' showing where the car was parked. You will then be able to state that the scammers have not proved the car was parked where they said it was.

If they have photographic proof it was parked on the land specified, then the man on the Clapham Omnibus would expect the scammers to show that proof to the court. Not producing a photo' showing where the car was parked would suggest on the balance of probabilities that the car was not where the scammers said it was.
In addition, you were there. You are a witness, and an account of the actual events occurring at the time, signed under a statement of truth, is evidence.

That’s interesting! I’m 99% sure I was parking in the last sport as I was right outside pizza express. And there was no more spaces. They street was full. I didn’t think then ANPR took a photo of where you was parked? I thought it just took photos coming in and out? Another thing is can I find out when them signs outside Pizza Express were put there? People have won POPLA appeals in this car parking place. Is it worth screen shooting what they won on and removing any usernames and what not? And showing the court people have won because the signage is bad! That was in feb 19 though. But seems they had the same issue as me?! 

Fruitcake

Use anything at all that will help your case.
You can check with the local planning department if advertising consent was approved for the signs, and if so when it was approved. I'm not sure if you will be able to determine when the signs were changed though.

ANPR scameras appear on the 2016 GSV images but not on the one (and there is only one) image from 2018. The GSV image of the entrance and exit are from 2012, so only help with setting the scene.

I'll show all of this in a sequence of images to give an idea of the changes over time. Any photos you can get will help greatly, especially if we can show noting has changed since the GSV images were taken. Images from dates either side of the alleged event are always useful.

 

Redx

Bear in mind that all this evidence and pictures etc is for the witness stage in several months time , not the defence which has already been filed , so there is no rush on this evidence gathering , it's good to get it all whilst fresh in your mind though

I suspect that CEL will discontinue before the court hearing , after seeing your WS plus Exhibits , especially if they should not be monitoring the sides outside 32

Coupon-mad

I didn’t think then ANPR took a photo of where you was parked? I thought it just took photos coming in and out? 

Obviously, that is true, so why are you asking questions as if it matters?  You can surely see this is a strong defence point. 

You were not parked on the land listed in the Particulars of Claim and you are the only witness.

Fruitcake

Coupon-mad said:

I didn’t think then ANPR took a photo of where you was parked? I thought it just took photos coming in and out? 

Obviously, that is true, so why are you asking questions as if it matters?  You can surely see this is a strong defence point. 

You were not parked on the land listed in the Particulars of Claim and you are the only witness.

That's not quite true.

The NTK and rejection letter specify 34 - 38 Woodford Rd.
The PoC on the claim form just says Woodford Rd car park.

Woodford road is several miles long and has six other car parks along it for, a church, a nursing home, a golf course, a clothes shop, a filling station and an architect's business. 
Typical vague PoC.

Coupon-mad

Ah, so the defence needs to point that out then.  The NTK is the statutory document so the point is still well worth stating.

Fruitcake

Coupon-mad said:

Ah, so the defence needs to point that out then.  The NTK is the statutory document so the point is still well worth stating.

The defence is already in. This will need to be brought up at WS stage.

Fruitcake

As already mentioned, you won't need these images for a while, but do compare them with any that you take in the near future to see what has changed, and what hasn't. 

Heading south with the entrance to the service road on the right, image taken in 2012.



Driver's view as they enter the service road, image from 2012. The bank is number 42, outside the scam zone. There doesn't appear to be a number 40, so possibly the bank took up both buildings but just kept one number. If there are now any entrance signs on the driver's side, it will be a good idea to take any photos you can get with the lamp post or windscreen pillar obscuring them to show easy how it would be for a driver to miss them.



Looking back towards the entrance of the service road, image from 2016.



Scam zone and Pizza Express, image from 2016. Note the pair of ANPR scameras and sign underneath. 




Four signs and the scameras on the driver's side, image from 2016. The signs are in the name of Starpark.



Driver's side signs and scameras removed, image from 2018.



Pizza Express and the business next door, clearly showing the cake shop is at number 34.

shortysky

Umkomaas said:

But no matter when I take them it will have the background light from the street light at the front of the main road! 

That's not a problem as that would (presumably) have been working at the time. What you don't want to do is to add flash to it and light the whole place up like a Christmas tree. 

Do you have a friend perhaps who might be able to do this for you, given you have your little one to care for - first priority always! 🙂

Yes true it may not of been working, my friend said she would go up when she had a minute. Have enough time for her to take them.