Please Help - have to submit a defence asap - very poor signage at non pay and display car park

KeithP

RapidD said:

Thanks guys. I am now using the template by jrhys, excellent!

Things are coming along nicely. One thing I want to ask is, is it OK for me to refer to the claimant's witness statement in mine? (as theirs's arrived first). i.e. 'according to the claimant's witness statement (Ref.25).............        however, (disprove their BS)

Thanks.

Yes that's fine.

RapidD

Hi Everyone, 

I respect this isn't a legal advice service! So may I kindly ask for your personal opinions on the opening to my witness statement please? (this is before getting into case studies such as beavis etc).

I'm particularly interested in point 7. where I've tripped them up on their own witness statement but don't want to get to appear too big for my boots!

For context, the charge is for being over the 5 hour limit of maximum stay (no charges for under 5 hours).

Thanks!!

--------------

1.         I am ---------- and I am the defendant against whom this claim is made. The facts below are true to the best of my belief and my account has been prepared based upon my own knowledge.

2.         In my statement I shall refer to exhibits within the evidence supplied with this statement, referring to page and reference numbers where appropriate. My defence is repeated and I will say as follows:

Background:

3.         Prior to the date of the alleged offence, I have visited the car park in question on a regular basis for approximately 9 years, to conduct business in the form of informal interviews with jobseekers. These have been held at the establishment currently known as ------------ and prior to that, ----------. This establishment shares a large car park with several other businesses at the -------- Leisure Park. My visits to said car park are on average once every 4-8 weeks, and can last for a duration of 2-6 hours, although over 5 hours is rare. On the day in question I spent the duration of my stay in --------- establishment, as evidenced by the receipt provided in ref222.

4.         To the best of my knowledge the car park has never been, and is not currently ‘pay and display’ or charges any fees for time spent parked. Furthermore, it did not previously have any timing restrictions in relation to a maximum allotted time to park, prior to 16th August 2019, according to the claimant’s witness statement (Ref. 24).  

Sequence of events and signage:

5.         I did not see any signs during my entry to, stay at or exit from the car park. Exhibit A (HV9) shows the entrance to -------- Leisure Park displaying what the claimant refers to as entrance signage, presumably in the form of an electronic sign (to the left) and a parking sign (to the right). (HV9) and (HV11) show that said electronic sign has not been in operation around the time of the alleged offence and offers no information relating to parking restrictions. (HV8) shows that due to the parking sign visible in (HV9) being at ground level, said parking sign is in fact routinely blocked by stationary traffic at the traffic lights, particularly to oncoming traffic turning left into the Leisure Park, as I did.

6.         The Claimant provides no evidence that any signage claimed to be at the site on the material date was visible from any car entering, parking in or exiting the parking area. Any close-up photographs of signage cannot be considered sufficient as evidence of their visibility from the entrance nor from any areas, like the one in which I parked. Furthermore, on closer inspection of said signage, (Exhibit 2 of the claimant’s witness statement ‘the contract’), it appears to provide false information. It claims that the site has warden patrols 24 hours a day, however in point 10. of the claimant’s witness statement, it is made clear that ‘this is not a warden controlled site’. Therefore, even if said signage were visible, it cannot be considered evidence due to the inaccuracies in the information it provides.  

7.         Having revisited the site and parked my car in a similar parking space to the date of the alleged offence, VID1 shows my approach to the car parking area of the -------- and a panoramic view of the area, which shows no visible parking signs. This is further evidenced by HV3, 5, 6 & 12 which show still photos of the different angles of the --------- car park area from where the car was parked.

8.         At a later date I discussed the situation with the manager of the --------- establishment. He believed the landowner instructed the claimant’s company to introduce parking restrictions due to the site’s town centre location, as they suspected people working in the town were using the car park all day whilst at work. He did not believe the restrictions were in place to penalise genuine customers in one of the businesses in the leisure park.

Le_Kirk

It is normal (huh, what is normal for PPCs?) to have a warning sign displayed for a period (weeks/months) PRIOR to a change of condition, e.g. from 5 hour max to 4 hours max etc.  Were there any such signs?  Did you check with the relevant Code of Practice (IPC or BPA) to see what it states?  Did the PPC apply to the local council for variation to any planning condition attaching to the car park?

RapidD

Le_Kirk said:

It is normal (huh, what is normal for PPCs?) to have a warning sign displayed for a period (weeks/months) PRIOR to a change of condition, e.g. from 5 hour max to 4 hours max etc.  Were there any such signs?  Did you check with the relevant Code of Practice (IPC or BPA) to see what it states?  Did the PPC apply to the local council for variation to any planning condition attaching to the car park?

I don't believe any such signs to advise of impending changes to parking terms existed. I also think it's unlikely as the contracts were signed by the two parties 4 days apart so that wouldn't leave much grace period. 

They're IPC and I'm currently knee deep trying to find the their guidelines on this particular issue. I've re-read their whole witness statement again and there's no reference to having warning signs up. 

I have no idea about planning condition or how to find that information to be honest. I'll see what I can find. 

Thanks again.

p.s. does the rest look OK?

RapidD

Le_Kirk said:

It is normal (huh, what is normal for PPCs?) to have a warning sign displayed for a period (weeks/months) PRIOR to a change of condition, e.g. from 5 hour max to 4 hours max etc.  Were there any such signs?  Did you check with the relevant Code of Practice (IPC or BPA) to see what it states?  Did the PPC apply to the local council for variation to any planning condition attaching to the car park?

I can't actually see anything in the IPC code of conduct that reference's that. 'Change's to operator's terms and conditions' is referenced as follows:

'9.1 It is your responsibility to establish whether any land upon which you operate is subject to any Byelaws. Where land is subject to Byelaws you must ensure that your practices are in accordance with them or, alternatively, that you operate a scheme that is not prohibited by them'

As far as I know, these by laws cannot be obtained, or certainly not quickly.

Unless I find further information I'll settle by adding the sentence:

"There were no visible signs warning of any impending changes to the terms and conditions of the car park, prior to ---------- date".

Coupon-mad

There is nothing really about bylaws or Planning/advertising consent that’s useful in the IPC CoP but there is a section about adding extra signage to warn about changes to parking enforcement, tariffs, rules, free time, etc. 

The consultation doesn’t take lots of reading, you aren’t meant to read that entire chatty thread, just the first post and hop straight to the Consultation link:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6286801/government-consultation-re-private-parking-charge-levels-august-2021-please-bookmark-this-thread/p1

closes Friday morning.

RapidD

Coupon-mad said:

There is nothing really about bylaws or Planning/advertising consent that’s useful in the IPC CoP but there is a section about adding extra signage to warn about changes to parking enforcement, tariffs, rules, free time, etc. 

Yes indeed, thanks for that. I have now added in the following paragraph:

5.         Guidance provided to the claimant in page 24 of the IPC’s code of conduct (ref333) states that additional signage should be provided at the car park entrance “where there is any change in the terms and conditions materially affecting the motorist”. There were no visible signs warning of any impending changes to the terms and conditions of the car park observed on any of my earlier visits prior to (DATE), furthermore the claimant has failed to provide evidence that any such signage has ever existed prior to their commencement of enforcement. Due to the relatively short time in between commencement of enforcement and the APN issued to me, I believe this to be a critical failure of the claimant to follow the guidelines set out by the IPC’s code of conduct and has a direct bearing on this case.  

RapidD

Update - it's coming along very nicely now, I feel like I've almost finished. I just need to put costs together and make sure I've got the correct case studies in. 

To that end, can I ask....are paragraphs 98, 193 and 198 relevant to my case? Which was free parking for 5 hours on a retail park (but overstayed). I need to do more reading on this but it almost feels like I'm fighting against my own argument.

I've proved that the land owner was not losing money by me being there (doesn't charge other customers for parking) by showing my receipt and that the longer I was there, the more I was paying the establishment. But is 98/193/198 more relevant to car parks in which you pay for tickets?

Thanks again..

Jenni_D

The Beavis case was indeed for parking on a car park where parking was free (for 2 hours I think). And Mr. Beavis himself was there longer than 2 hours because a) he was spending a decent sum of money at a business there and b) the business messed up hence the cause of the delay.

I don't recall what those paragraphs relate to, but I'm sure one of the key outcomes of Beavis was that the PCN value included all costs of business - including debt recovery - so it's part of the argument against double recovery.

Le_Kirk

RapidD said:

Update - it's coming along very nicely now, I feel like I've almost finished. I just need to put costs together and make sure I've got the correct case studies in. 

To that end, can I ask....are paragraphs 98, 193 and 198 relevant to my case? Which was free parking for 5 hours on a retail park (but overstayed). I need to do more reading on this but it almost feels like I'm fighting against my own argument.

I've proved that the land owner was not losing money by me being there (doesn't charge other customers for parking) by showing my receipt and that the longer I was there, the more I was paying the establishment. But is 98/193/198 more relevant to car parks in which you pay for tickets?

Thanks again..

Yes, leave it all in, it goes to prove that it is unlawful to try to add "debt admin" costs or whatever they are calling it this week.