National Parking Enforcement - County Court Claim

milo_2020

Prepping some notes... what should I do? The time is 30 minutes which has been allocated, what are they going to ask me and how best should I prepare further?

patient_dream

milo_2020 said:

I do wonder why all their main points keep referencing the driver leaving the car even from the appeals process they were told it was the passenger and still to this day and court hearing they are still referencing the offence as the driver left the vehicle. I hope the judge can see that they continuously reference that and state that is the offence, however that is not what they are showing regardless of the signage and contract?

How do they know a driver left a car unless they have clear pictures of the person getting out of the car and which side of the car ?  
They have to prove this to the judge and yes YOU confirm your statement by saying you will swear to this on oath

The "rent by the hour legal" cannot do the same as he or she was not there and is only reliant on the info given by BWLegal which you already know is false

As far as those ridiculous charges, that is all they are. This is county small claims court, not a way to extort money. Judges do not like their court being scammed. It's bad enough with the fake add-on BWL apply which is a very feeble attempt  of double recovery which in turn is abuse of process.

You have been given all the positive points above and you should prepare a crib sheet for yourself listing everything said here.

You certainly do not need to study the Beavis case but more so what the Supreme court ruled
If you have not done so already watch the actual ruling .... it's about half way through
6 May 2021 at 10:50AM
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/78306189#Comment_78306189

It is very clear what was said ...
"The main reason for the charge was to meet the costs of enforcing the parking rules"

 

milo_2020

patient_dream said:

milo_2020 said:

I do wonder why all their main points keep referencing the driver leaving the car even from the appeals process they were told it was the passenger and still to this day and court hearing they are still referencing the offence as the driver left the vehicle. I hope the judge can see that they continuously reference that and state that is the offence, however that is not what they are showing regardless of the signage and contract?

How do they know a driver left a car unless they have clear pictures of the person getting out of the car and which side of the car ?  
They have to prove this to the judge and yes YOU confirm your statement by saying you will swear to this on oath

The "rent by the hour legal" cannot do the same as he or she was not there and is only reliant on the info given by BWLegal which you already know is false

As far as those ridiculous charges, that is all they are. This is county small claims court, not a way to extort money. Judges do not like their court being scammed. It's bad enough with the fake add-on BWL apply which is a very feeble attempt  of double recovery which in turn is abuse of process.

You have been given all the positive points above and you should prepare a crib sheet for yourself listing everything said here.

You certainly do not need to study the Beavis case but more so what the Supreme court ruled
If you have not done so already watch the actual ruling .... it's about half way through
6 May 2021 at 10:50AM
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/78306189#Comment_78306189

It is very clear what was said ...
"The main reason for the charge was to meet the costs of enforcing the parking rules"

 

They do not have pictures of the driver getting out of the car, the circled the passenger getting out in all their picture evidence but have not referenced the passenger at any point during the case.

I am very much hoping the judge can just see that they are saying the driver, I am saying the passenger, he will look at the pictures and see its the passenger and hopefully just decide there and then that the 'facts' they are stating for the case are then therefore all incorrect based on their own evidence.

Fingers crossed.

patient_dream

Silly question but is the car a right hand drive ?
This is all sounding like the parking company had a brain freeze and passed the same on to the legal.

A passenger has no contract in this situation and any pictures they took are irrelevant and no doubt the judge will quickly see that.

If this was me, I would be asking for the claim to be struck out for unreasonable behaviour and that the court covers your costs.

You should do a costs schedule up to say £95 which seems to be the going rate. Could be more as it is wasting the courts time as well

Coupon-mad

Only 30 minutes?  This is not your final hearing then.

Just 30 mins means this is a Directions Hearing, a bit like glorified mediation, where the Judge hopes you will fold and agree to settle.

Read other threads about these pointless mini hearings and get it done and move on.  Only prep needed is to point out holes in their case if there is something obvious that means they have no case.

Be aware they are often run by rookie Judges who know little about parking claims and who might well tell you that you have no defence due to ParkingEye v Beavis.  In fact, nothing has changed and you have the same case you always did.

As long as you used the forum defence and have submitted decent exhibits and witness statement (I assume they've been filed and served already, I have not read back?) then decline to settle and say you want your defence heard at a hearing.

Make sure you've provided your phone number to the court as required in the directions about this waste of time preliminary hearing.

Umkomaas

milo_2020 said:

Prepping some notes... what should I do? The time is 30 minutes which has been allocated, what are they going to ask me and how best should I prepare further?

A 30-minute hearing (have you received a date for this?) is normally held in advance of the full hearing which would appear to me to be some months away. 

The pre-hearing is likely to be in front of a DDJ, often with little knowledge or understanding of private parking issues. He/she will try to persuade you to settle, often denigrating your prospects of success, but you shouldn't be distracted by that, you have every right to a full hearing. The pre-hearing is designed to reduce the mushrooming number private parking cases going to full trial status. (Note both hearings will likely take place via phone/video link; no physical appearance at the county court required). 

But, I think there are a number of issues that might help you. While NPE are on the bandwagon of bulk issuing of proceedings, I don't see many of their cases ever getting in front of a Judge. 'Leaving the site' is a very high bar for the PPC to get over, and I can't recall any that have been successful; I think their job is more difficult than yours. 

While I can't give any guarantees, I see your case more likely heading for a discontinuation rather than a full hearing. Your job is to make sure you jump through any hoops rolled your way, and by their respective deadlines, demanded by the court process. 

milo_2020

patient_dream said:

Silly question but is the car a right hand drive ?
This is all sounding like the parking company had a brain freeze and passed the same on to the legal.

A passenger has no contract in this situation and any pictures they took are irrelevant and no doubt the judge will quickly see that.

If this was me, I would be asking for the claim to be struck out for unreasonable behaviour and that the court covers your costs.

You should do a costs schedule up to say £95 which seems to be the going rate. Could be more as it is wasting the courts time as well

Yes it is RHD, they can see this via lookup of registration plate too. I appealed saying it was the passenger and they started to say the passenger in their responses but then reverted back to the driver. During the entire appeals process I spoke about the driver not getting out of the car (including the defence submit). Their WS even referred to a line which said about the passenger getting out and it was a copy and paste response which referred to the driver accepting the contract by getting out. (???).

I don't really know how I would go about asking for the case to be struck out on unreasonable behaviour at the stage I am at now... I have stated, many, many times, very clearly and obviously at all stages this same point and its got this far.

In the WS I have submit a costs schedule, in response BWLegal sent me one over 700 pounds and then sent me a complete trial hearing document which is around 2.5" thick with a letter stating that its not too late to avoid a CCJ (lol). Although this was not filled in properly as some of the boxes were missed.

Sorry, I thought it was a 30 minute hearing because there is no reference on the letter to a pre-hearing, it just says Chelmsford County Court Hearing. Nothing about a pre-hearing, I wasn't aware that was a thing, apologies. 

Umkomaas

Sorry, I thought it was a 30 minute hearing because there is no reference on the letter to a pre-hearing, it just says Chelmsford County Court Hearing. Nothing about a pre-hearing, I wasn't aware that was a thing, apologies. 

As I said, that's normally the case with a 30-minute hearing, but as I've not seen what your paperwork says, I'm basing my opinion on the hundreds of similar cases I've seen here over the past 18 months or so.

Does your paperwork reveal any clues?  Have you had a date set for the 30-minute hearing?

milo_2020

4th January (2 days), I expect it will follow suit the other 30 minute hearings and therefore shall just decline to settle. Should I point out here that all the claims against me are as provided by their own evidence not true which is why I want to go to full trial although I think it should be struck out due to how obvious it is?

Umkomaas

milo_2020 said:

4th January (2 days), I expect it will follow suit the other 30 minute hearings and therefore shall just decline to settle. Should I point out here that all the claims against me are as provided by their own evidence not true which is why I want to go to full trial although I think it should be struck out due to how obvious it is?

You might wish should you have an opportunity, but nothing will be decided at a pre-hearing, particularly a strike.