BW Legal Court Claim - Defence Advice - UPDATE - WIN

sdrossy

Dear all,

I have recently had a court claim form come through the post. I have been following all the advice in the newbies thread. My date of service was 09/04. I submitted the acknowledgement of service on 14/04. I am now working on my defence.

Bit of background: Myself and my partner are both NHS frontline workers. Last year during lockdown we used a registered childminder so we could both get to our jobs at our local hospital. To access the childminder's property you have to enter the main gates of a car park. The property is one for 6 terraced houses each with a car park space outside. I was unaware that the car park adjacent was private and you had to be a patron of the nearby shops to park there. Not realising this and not seeing any clear signs i parked in a bay as there was nowhere to park outside the childminders house. I dropped my child and was parked for a total of two minutes (i have the timestamped photos from the cameras). Same thing happened in the afternoon. Now faced with £400+ fines and court claim from BW.

This is my defence so far (only point 2 and 3 of the defence copied from the other thread). I've redacted info regarding the name of the childminder/hospital as unsure if i should be sharing that here:

The facts as known to the Defendant:

2.       It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in question but liability is denied. 

3.  The Defendant and his partner are both front-line NHS workers. On 27/07/2020 the Defendant employed the services of [REGISTERED CHILDMINDER] to care for his child so he and his partner could attend their jobs at [HOSPITAL]. [REGISTERED CHILDMINDER] are based at a property within [CARPARK]. In order to access the property by car it is required that a person enter the main [CAR PARK] entrance. As there was no parking available directly outside the property of [REGISTERED CHILDMINDER] the Defendant parked in a nearby bay in the car park directly adjacent to [REGISTERED CHILDMINDER]'s property. The Defendant did not see any clearly legible signs that stated the car park was for patrons of the nearby shops only. Due to the lack of clear signage is was assumed that the Defendant could stop briefly to drop his child. The Defendant stopped in the car park at 08:17AM and departed at 08:19AM. Stopping for a total of two minutes. 

Following his shift at work the Defendant returned in the afternoon of the same day to collect his child. Again, the Defendant had to enter the main entrance of the car park and stopped in a nearby parking bay due to lack of parking in front of the residence of [REGISTERED CHILDMINDER]. The Defendant parked at 17:30PM and departed at 17:32PM. Again, stopping for a total of two minutes. 

Any advise would be appreciated. Should I add anything regarding a grace period? It would have taken me longer to read make sense of their vague signage than drop my daughter at the childminders! After returning to the car park to take pictures of the signs the only sign that I would have drove past was incredibly badly weathered and illegible unless right up close. I assume these sort of details I reserve for the witness statement.

Many thanks all.

Redx

Name the parking company

Post the issue date from the CCBC claim form , not the service date

BPA or IPC member ?

Car park location ?

Post pictures of the signs

sdrossy

Than you for your response. I may have messed up the date of service. The issue date was 09/04. I submitted acknowledgement on 14/04.

Company is NPE, so IPC.

Car park is St Augustine's Gate in Norwich.

I've uploaded images here as was having issues posting them in the comment: imgur. com/a/frl559N.
The forum wont let me post a link so there's a space between the . and com.

I've attached pictures of the entrance to the car park. Our childminder's house is one of the terraced houses on the right of the entrance. I've attached photos of the signs partially concealed by the trees on the left of the entrance and the badly weathered sign that i would have to have drove past to park in the bay I parked in.

Thank you.

KeithP

sdrossy said:

The issue date was 09/04. I submitted acknowledgement on 14/04.

With a Claim Issue Date of 9th April, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Wednesday 12th May 2021 to file your Defence.

That's over three weeks away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence, but please don't leave it to the last minute.

To create a Defence, and then file a Defence by email, look at the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Don't miss the deadline for filing a Defence.

beamerguy

sdrossy said:

Than you for your response. I may have messed up the date of service. The issue date was 09/04. I submitted acknowledgement on 14/04.

Company is NPE, so IPC.

Car park is St Augustine's Gate in Norwich.

I've uploaded images here as was having issues posting them in the comment: imgur. com/a/frl559N.
The forum wont let me post a link so there's a space between the . and com.

I've attached pictures of the entrance to the car park. Our childminder's house is one of the terraced houses on the right of the entrance. I've attached photos of the signs partially concealed by the trees on the left of the entrance and the badly weathered sign that i would have to have drove past to park in the bay I parked in.

Thank you.

sorry but even changing it to  ... imgur.com/a/frl559N ..... the link does not work

sdrossy

beamerguy said:

sdrossy said:

Than you for your response. I may have messed up the date of service. The issue date was 09/04. I submitted acknowledgement on 14/04.

Company is NPE, so IPC.

Car park is St Augustine's Gate in Norwich.

I've uploaded images here as was having issues posting them in the comment: imgur. com/a/frl559N.
The forum wont let me post a link so there's a space between the . and com.

I've attached pictures of the entrance to the car park. Our childminder's house is one of the terraced houses on the right of the entrance. I've attached photos of the signs partially concealed by the trees on the left of the entrance and the badly weathered sign that i would have to have drove past to park in the bay I parked in.

Thank you.

sorry but even changing it to  ... imgur.com/a/frl559N ..... the link does not work

Hi beamerguy,

That's frustrating. Alas, the forum is now letting me upload images! Please see images below:

Entrance to car park. Childminders house is the white terraced house with hanging basket:



Sign partially concealed by tree on left in first picture: 



Reverse of sign above:





Sign i would have to have driven past to park in the bay i parked in. Probably taken from closer than if i was in my car:




Close up of weathered sign:




Annotated locations:




Many thanks again.

Coupon-mad

That weathered sign isn going to be great as evidence attached to your WS.  A Judge is going to love that and your final picture, and also amusing is the one where NPE reckon there is some sort of 'no stopping zone' within a car park?!

beamerguy

Do BWLegal really believe they can win with those signs ?  WHAT A JOKE.
This is the problem with these robo claimers, they don't have a clue.


£400 +  ?    Is that 4 tickets plus the normal fake rubbish they add on ?

The last picture does not indicate there are regulations on entry to the road,
The sign hidden by a tree branch on the left, indicates that the road on the left has restrictions
The tiny sign, the weathered sign on the wall is not fit for purpose

There is no ANPR so that means a walkabout goon or .... one of the residents in the row of houses where you park your car.   NPE could be offering commission

Please give a breakdown of the claim

D_P_Dance

Surely white pint on very light  blue cannot be held to form a contract   I can hardly read ti.

Have you complained to your MP?

Le_Kirk

Some of that defence would be better saved for the witness statement (WS) when you can add those delightful pictures of that wonderful (not) sign and tell the story.  Keep your defence short and precise just referring to lack of signage, which opens the door for your WS to tell the whole story later.  As there are paragraphs relating to signage in the standard defence template, make sure you are not duplicating them with what you say.

sdrossy

beamerguy said:

Do BWLegal really believe they can win with those signs ?  WHAT A JOKE.
This is the problem with these robo claimers, they don't have a clue.


£400 +  ?    Is that 4 tickets plus the normal fake rubbish they add on ?

The last picture does not indicate there are regulations on entry to the road,
The sign hidden by a tree branch on the left, indicates that the road on the left has restrictions
The tiny sign, the weathered sign on the wall is not fit for purpose

There is no ANPR so that means a walkabout goon or .... one of the residents in the row of houses where you park your car.   NPE could be offering commission

Please give a breakdown of the claim

The total is now £415.24. That's £120 x 2 for each parking ticked from NPE. £60 x 2 for BW Legal's "recovery costs" for each ticket. £35 court fee. £50 legal reps costs. £10.24 interest.

There are cameras in the car park. I don't think they're ANPR so I think they have a goon manning the cameras rather than a walkabout goon. I have timestamped photos from the cameras from my SAR request. They show me parking, dropping my child at the childminders and promptly leaving.

D_P_Dance said:

Surely white pint on very light  blue cannot be held to form a contract   I can hardly read ti.

Have you complained to your MP?

Not yet but will be sure to do so. There a quite a few of these criminal enterprises in Norwich,