JD Gym Parking Fine Claim £1000+ Amount

ASRman

Hello guys

I am facing a small claim issued by DCB Legal with a value in excess of £1,200. The claim relates to 6 allegedly unpaid parking tickets whilst my car was parked at JD Gyms. As a member I am entitled to 2.5 hours parking whilst using the gym. Each time I visit the gym I input my reg into the gym iPad to validate parking. 

I have managed to contact a director at JD who has helpfully written me a letter confirming:

1. I was a member of the gym on each occasion. 
2. I was using the gym (i.e. I had logged into the gym) on each occasion
3. I did not on any occasion over stay 2.5 hours permitted time

The director provided me with exact timestamps of each occasion noting my entry and exit time evidencing the above. 

The director could not provide me with any evidence as to input of my registration. 

I have witness statements from gym members to state that I always input my registration and did so on each occasion but also made note of the fact that early on during that period (the 6 fines were in fairly close time proximity and were during first couple months of gym opening) many gym members had issues with validating their reg and on some occasions they simply had to write down their reg on a piece of paper so the gym would later validate. My firm stance is that there must have been a technical issue/connection issue with the iPad on those dates meaning my parking was not validated despite me inputting my reg. Of course the easiest way to prove would be CCTV but the gym cannot provide this as it is too far back in time (late 2019). 

The director could not assist any further beyond the letter above and therefore I am left to fend for myself against DCB. 

DCB appear to not be backing down so I am looking for some advice or relevant case law/statute that can bolster my case. 

Essentially my argument is that I was authorised to park, that authority has been evidenced clearly. I am facing a large and unreasonable claim as a result of a technical failure with the gym iPad. And that the Claimant parking company has failed to prove otherwise. I am also arguing that the Claimant has failed to prove a genuine loss as it has been shown I was permitted to park as a gym member and did not at any point overstay my free parking period. 

The Claimant has submitted a generic list of iPad inputs on the day in an attempt to show the system was working. My argument is that fails to provide for the possibility of connection issues which may arise randomly and spontaneously. I have sourced various other news sources ) and reviews on JD Gyms evidencing numerous other members facing identical technical issues. 

Furthermore, the car park is ANPR operated. Therefore surely the sole reason for the ipad is to notify the parking company of gym members registrations. I did submit evidence to DCB at a very early stage evidencing my gym membership and permission to park yet they have aggressively pressed on with litigation. My opinion is that my early submission of evidence to DCB proving my attendances to the gym by the JD director should be viewed as 'equivalent evidence' to that of the iPad. If the signage contract results in automatic issue of fines despite possible technical issues with the gym iPad would this not be viewed as an unreasonable contract term?

Le_Kirk

Have you received: -
a) Letter before/of Claim?
b) N1 claim form from Northampton CCBC?  If so what is the date of issue?

D_P_Dance

• Clearly they have included unlawful amounts here, read  this and complain to your MP..
• 
  

• Excel v Wilkinson

  
  

  At the Bradford County Court, District Judge Claire Jackson (now HHJ Jackson, a Specialist Civil Circuit Judge) decided to hear a 'test case' a few months ago, where £60 had been added to a parking charge despite Judges up and down the country repeatedly disallowing that sum and warning parking firms not to waste court time with such spurious claims.   That case was Excel v Wilkinson: G4QZ465V, heard in July 2020 and leave to appeal was refused and that route was not pursued.  The Judge concluded that such claims are proceedings with 'an improper collateral purpose'.   This Judge - and others who have since copied her words and struck dozens of cases out in late 2020 and into 2021 - went into significant detail and concluded that parking operators (such as this Claimant) are seeking to circumvent CPR 27.14 as well as breaching the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   DJ Hickinbottom has recently struck more cases out in that court area, stating: ''I find that striking out this claim is the only appropriate manner in which the disapproval of the court can be shown''.

  https://www.dropbox.com/s/16qovzulab1szem/G4QZ465V Excel v Wilkinson.pdf?dl=0

  FWIIW, imo, if they took this to court they would struggle.  

ASRman

Le_Kirk said:

Have you received: -
a) Letter before/of Claim?
b) N1 claim form from Northampton CCBC?  If so what is the date of issue?

No letter before claim was received and the date of issue was 30/12/2020 for 6 fines all dating between 10/2019 and 11/2019. 

And many thanks D_P_Dance for the information regarding unlawful amounts. I have calculated that they have certainly added £60 to each ‘£100’ fine amount therefore ties in with what you are saying. 

Without wanting to waste anybodies time I should add that DCBs particulars were incredibly sparse and I have already submitted my defence quite some months ago. The Court has since directed us that this case first needs to be heard at what is known as a Court Mediation Hearing (apparently heard in front of a judge rather than a mediator). 

I suppose my questions are would it be possible request the Court to amend or include say for example the Excel Wilkinson case into my defence or is it too late for that (it probably is). If not would it be possible to incorporate any additional points into a witness statement or other evidence? 

Le_Kirk

You cannot amend a defence (well you can but it costs money).  Have you been told to submit a witness statement and evidence before your Mediation Hearing?  If so, have you done that?  It might be possible to submit a supplementary WS.  If not there should be an opportunity to submit one before the main hearing and in that you can (subtly) include the Excel Wilkinson case, especially if you have referred to the added £60 in your defence.  Do not be intimidated by the judge at the Meditation Hearing, who (reportedly) will try to bully you by saying your defence is rubbish and you should just pay!

Redx

Claimant is Bank Parking , as shown in this pepipoo thread

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=140158

Where some questions remain unanswered

Coupon-mad

You must have to get a WS and evidence in before the Directions Hearing.  It'll be on a Court letter.  You absolutely cannot be relying upon a defence only, there must be a date by which you need to submit your WS and evidence.

Otherwise, how can the Judge at the pointless 'why don't you settle up, Mr Defendant, and save us all time?' mediation hearing, has nothing to look at.  He/she cannot consider the directions and merits of the case without seeing WS and evidence from both sides.

The director could not provide me with any evidence as to input of my registration. 

Use the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/3134/contents/made

Whilst the cancellation part isn't relevant, the 'Information' section is, because requiring people to have to use an iPad to input their registration every time can be argued to be a Distance Contract, and the consumer law on that sort of contract concluded by digital inputs by the consumer, requires the trader to produce a receipt for the transaction (input) by durable medium.  THat can be an email but has to be supplied to confirm the digital input.

No parking firms do this.  The lack of receipt makes it impossible for a gym visitor to know which days the system has worked and which days it hasn't, and a blip can certainly be temporary - a connectivity dropout for a minute would catch at least one person and they would never know because there isn't even a confirmation message, let alone the required receipt supplied 'by durable medium'.

As such, that leads neatly to an argument that the term that requires a gym member (rather than having their VRM exempted on a whitelist from day one, as staff at the gym do, and is easy for parking firms to record) to have to input their VRM correctly every visit, is a 'concealed pitfall or trap'.  That was a consideration in the Beavis case, and even if it's not deliberate, it places an imbalance and unfair burden upon the consumer.  That's a breach of the CRA 2015 - unfair terms and notices are not enforceable.

The MHCLG draft Code of Practice, at the start, lists the applicable laws identified as relevant and one of those laws listed in the Draft Code, is indeed, the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013...so clearly the new statutory framework will be requiring PPCs to comply with the law they've not been complying with, to date.

ASRman

Redx said:

Claimant is Bank Parking , as shown in this pepipoo thread

Where some questions remain unanswered

Thanks Redx.

Replies below:

Issue date of the claim form from the CCBC in Northampton ??
30/12/2020 for 6 fines all dating between 10/2019 and 11/2019. 

Has the AOS been done online , on MCOL ? On the gov website ?
Yes on MCOL. 

Has the defence been submitted yet ?

Yes. To be honest my defence is not brilliant as I have only discovered this place subsequently. It essentially re-iterates the facts in my initial post but probably lack much of legal framework/backing. I am hoping I can bulk up my witness statement/evidence in order to stand a chance. 

Did the claimant comply with POFA ?
Im not sure what this is, I will read up on it and check. 

Has the driver been admitted ?
Yes I admitted myself to be the driver as the core of my defence relies on the fact that I was entitled to park and was using the gym at the time in accordance with the parking terms. Essentially I am arguing that I have not breached the contract terms and if I had, it was through no fault of my own due to a potentially fault/technical issue with the gym iPad.

ASRman

Le_Kirk said:

You cannot amend a defence (well you can but it costs money).  Have you been told to submit a witness statement and evidence before your Mediation Hearing?  If so, have you done that?  It might be possible to submit a supplementary WS.  If not there should be an opportunity to submit one before the main hearing and in that you can (subtly) include the Excel Wilkinson case, especially if you have referred to the added £60 in your defence.  Do not be intimidated by the judge at the Meditation Hearing, who (reportedly) will try to bully you by saying your defence is rubbish and you should just pay!

Thanks Le Kirk. I have not yet been told to submit a witness statement or evidence so hopefully that opportunity will arise in due course. Really grateful for your advice I will have a browse on these forums for some templates. If I am able to include some of the better arguments you guys have made mention of above I think I will stand a much better chance of actually winning. 

Coupon-mad said:

You must have to get a WS and evidence in before the Directions Hearing.  It'll be on a Court letter.  You absolutely cannot be relying upon a defence only, there must be a date by which you need to submit your WS and evidence.

Otherwise, how can the Judge at the pointless 'why don't you settle up, Mr Defendant, and save us all time?' mediation hearing, has nothing to look at.  He/she cannot consider the directions and merits of the case without seeing WS and evidence from both sides.

The director could not provide me with any evidence as to input of my registration. 

Use the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013:



Whilst the cancellation part isn't relevant, the 'Information' section is, because requiring people to have to use an iPad to input their registration every time can be argued to be a Distance Contract, and the consumer law on that sort of contract concluded by digital inputs by the consumer, requires the trader to produce a receipt for the transaction (input) by durable medium.  THat can be an email but has to be supplied to confirm the digital input.

No parking firms do this.  The lack of receipt makes it impossible for a gym visitor to know which days the system has worked and which days it hasn't, and a blip can certainly be temporary - a connectivity dropout for a minute would catch at least one person and they would never know because there isn't even a confirmation message, let alone the required receipt supplied 'by durable medium'.

As such, that leads neatly to an argument that the term that requires a gym member (rather than having their VRM exempted on a whitelist from day one, as staff at the gym do, and is easy for parking firms to record) to have to input their VRM correctly every visit, is a 'concealed pitfall or trap'.  That was a consideration in the Beavis case, and even if it's not deliberate, it places an imbalance and unfair burden upon the consumer.  That's a breach of the CRA 2015 - unfair terms and notices are not enforceable.

The MHCLG draft Code of Practice, at the start, lists the applicable laws identified as relevant and one of those laws listed in the Draft Code, is indeed, the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013...so clearly the new statutory framework will be requiring PPCs to comply with the law they've not been complying with, to date.

coupon-mad you are a true gent. Thank you for the detailed post providing this information. This is gold dust to me. I would never have picked up on this so I am grateful. I will be sure to incorporate the arguments into my WS and further evidence. If it is OK (I should probably check forum rules) I might post my WS up here for you chaps to have a quick skim before I go ahead and submit it.

Coupon-mad

coupon-mad you are a true gent.

Nope, I'm a laydee, a Mum of four...but I appreciate the compliment!

ASRman

Coupon-mad said:

coupon-mad you are a true gent.

Nope, I'm a laydee, a Mum of four...but I appreciate the compliment!

Oops my apologies! 🤣