Disputing a ticket - frustration of contract?

Vanadesse

How would I get a copy of the contract before it being included in an evidence pack? They haven’t included photos of signage at any point. 

Snakes_Belly

I doubt that you will get a copy of the landowner contract until they send their WS and then it might a cobbled up version.

When you send your defence state that you want to see evidence of landowner authority. The Pre Action Protocol states that they should provide this information. I doubt that they will send it though.   

With regard to the signage when you appealed to IAS what did Excel load up on their prima facie case?. There could be some images of signage.  The information should still be there on the IAS appeal platform.

Other than that you may be able to find something on google maps. You can go back on google maps and Fruitcake has done a very good piece on how to do this which I think is in the newbies.

Turnip won a case against this company or VCS and that involved a dodgy landowner contract. I am not sure on what basis it was dismissed but it may be worth taking a look. That was in the Manchester area near the airport. 

Snakes_Belly

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5890336/vcs-letter-before-claim-case-dismissed/p14

This was Turnip's thread but it's not really clear on what basis the judge dismissed the case. There was though an out of date mandate. 

Vanadesse

Their appeal is below, there were no documents for me to access. 

The operator made their Prima Facie Case on 05/12/2016 16:34:44. 

The Operator Reported That...

The appellant was the driver.
The appellant was the keeper.
ANPR/CCTV was used.
The Notice to Keeper was sent on 22/03/2016.
A response was recieved from the Notice to Keeper.
The ticket was issued on 22/03/2016.
The charge is based in Contract.

The Operator Made The Following Comments...

1. The Ashton Retail Park Car Park is private land, which provides parking for customers. Motorists are allowed to enter to park their vehicles provided that they abide by any displayed conditions of parking.

2. There are 10 signs on site: 1 Entrance Board (1200mm x 600mm), 7 Information Signs (1200mm x 600mm) and 2 Tariff Boards (1200mm x 1000mm). There are also 3 P&D ticket machines fitted with “Pay Here” cones at a height of approximately 2.5 metres, situated at key locations throughout the area. Site photographs supplied confirm that the signs can be observed at the entrance and throughout the car park.

3. The signs state: “This is a Pay On Entry Pay & Display Car Park” and “A free period of 30 minutes is allowed after a vehicle has entered the car park. A valid pay & display ticket must be purchased for a longer stay” and, “Charges 12am - 6pm Monday - Sunday” and makes it clear that any motorist parking in contravention of the Terms and Conditions of displayed will be liable for a Parking Charge Notice (PCN).

4. ANPR images supplied show that the appellant's vehicle entered the car park at 14:58 and exited at 15:44, a parking duration of 46 minutes which is 16 minutes longer than the 30 minutes free parking allowed before a P&D ticket must be purchased. 

5. A search of the P&D ticket database, which records all tickets purchased at the Ashton Retail Park Car Park, confirms that no ticket with the VRM “MA09WLR'' was purchased during the time the appellant's vehicle was there. The supplied data also shows that other motorists were correctly purchasing P&D tickets throughout the appellant's stay in the car park.

6. In their appeal to Excel Parking services, the appellant does not dispute their failure to purchase and display a valid Pay & Display. The appellant has explained that at the time in question they were driving in heavy rain when their windscreen wipers stopped working, so they pulled into the car park, contacted the RAC and awaited the arrival of the RAC mechanic. The appellant has explained that they had no change on them with which to purchase a ticket and that there 10 months old child was asleep in the vehicle and that they could not leave the child whilst they went to get the change. The appellant has also stated that due to heavy rain they did not want to take their child out of the vehicle.
7. The above points do not mitigate the appellant's contravention. When entering this private land it is solely the motorist's responsibility to familiarise themselves with and to fully comply with the Terms and Conditions displayed. A helpline telephone number is displayed on all signage, for any motorist who has any queries, or who is experiencing difficulty. This was not utilised by the appellant. Had the appellant contacted our helpline provision could have been made for them which could have prevented the PCN.

8. In their appeal to us, the appellant has further stated that they did not prevent another from parking. This is not a relevant point. The signage (supplied) makes it clear that any motorist staying longer than 30 minutes must purchase and display a P&D ticket. The adjudicator will note that the appellant does not dispute not purchasing and displaying a P&D ticket and therefore admits their contravention of the Terms and Conditions displayed.

9. In their appeal to us, the appellant also stated that they did not cause a loss to ourselves. The signage onsite makes it clear that any motorist contravening the terms and conditions displayed will be liable for a PCN. We must advise that our charges are neither extravagant nor unconscionable and as such, are commercially justified and legitimately enforceable. We would also refer to the recent judgment passed down by the Supreme Court in the case of ParkingEye v Beavis ([2015] UKSC 67).

10. In their appeal to the IAS, the appellant has additionally disputes that they were parked and has stated that they stopped. The appellant therefore questions what amounts to "parking" and "stopping"; this is a question of fact and degree. The courts have interpreted parking as including stopping, so long as the vehicle is stationary and in a fixed position for a period of time, no matter how short or whether the vehicle remains occupied or vacant.

11. The appellant failed to purchase valid Pay and Display ticket and therefore became liable for the Parking Charge Notice as per the Terms and Conditions displayed.

Snakes_Belly

Looks like that you can only go back to 2018 on google maps on the actual car park.

I can see a sign in 2011 from the main road  .  It looks like their signage but can't tell whether it is Excel or VCS. It blurred from a distance and I only know that it's there because I am looking for signage.

There is no sign on entry in 2011 which is where the contract is formed. 

Fruitcake is very good at looking at these images.


https://www.google.com/maps/place/Buzz+Bingo+and+The+Slots+Room+Ashton/@53.49059,-2.0978657,3a,75y,350.69h,89.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spQfqT3AN1GlHHJw5Ej_NBg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m8!1m2!2m1!1sashton+retail+park!3m4!1s0x487bb65078d0db6d:0x3da2a9d8a36fae!8m2!3d53.4912548!4d-2.0984399
  

Snakes_Belly

2. There are 10 signs on site: 1 Entrance Board (1200mm x 600mm), 7 Information Signs (1200mm x 600mm) and 2 Tariff Boards (1200mm x 1000mm). There are also 3 P&D ticket machines fitted with “Pay Here” cones at a height of approximately 2.5 metres, situated at key locations throughout the area. Site photographs supplied confirm that the signs can be observed at the entrance and throughout the car park.

Are you sure that they have not uploaded these?

There was no entrance sign in 2011 and in 2018 there was a different operator. 

In 2011 the signage was sparce and certainly not what is stated in their prina facie case.   

Snakes_Belly

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Buzz+Bingo+and+The+Slots+Room+Ashton/@53.4905532,-2.0978176,3a,75y,350.2h,87.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1st4jr8B_GwqvwMhOhUAdyQQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m8!1m2!2m1!1sashton+retail+park!3m4!1s0x487bb65078d0db6d:0x3da2a9d8a36fae!8m2!3d53.4912548!4d-2.0984399

Found a google map from 2017. The signage at the entry is not sufficient to form a contract in my opinion. I don't know what others will think.  There is also quite a lot of distraction from other random signage which makes it difficult to process at the best of times when driving especially when driving in heavy rain. You are also entering the car park from a very busy road. I would have missed that Excel sign on entry.

You could not stop on the A6043 so you did the only thing that you could.    

There is a case about processing information where there is a lot of random signage. It is not a parking ticket case but it is relevant to this scenario.  

The formation of the contract on entry can be robustly defended in my opinion. The case that Excel will cite is totally irrelevant to this scenario.

Not sure about the 16 minutes, There have been cases dismissed when motorists have exceeded by this amount of time. There will be regulars who can advise on this. 

Vanadesse

Snakes_Belly said:

2. There are 10 signs on site: 1 Entrance Board (1200mm x 600mm), 7 Information Signs (1200mm x 600mm) and 2 Tariff Boards (1200mm x 1000mm). There are also 3 P&D ticket machines fitted with “Pay Here” cones at a height of approximately 2.5 metres, situated at key locations throughout the area. Site photographs supplied confirm that the signs can be observed at the entrance and throughout the car park.

Are you sure that they have not uploaded these?

There was no entrance sign in 2011 and in 2018 there was a different operator. 

In 2011 the signage was sparce and certainly not what is stated in their prina facie case.   

It may be that they were uploaded but I have no way to access them. I know I uploaded documents, which I can’t access either. 

Snakes_Belly said:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Buzz+Bingo+and+The+Slots+Room+Ashton/@53.4905532,-2.0978176,3a,75y,350.2h,87.27t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1st4jr8B_GwqvwMhOhUAdyQQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m8!1m2!2m1!1sashton+retail+park!3m4!1s0x487bb65078d0db6d:0x3da2a9d8a36fae!8m2!3d53.4912548!4d-2.0984399

Found a google map from 2017. The signage at the entry is not sufficient to form a contract in my opinion. I don't know what others will think.  There is also quite a lot of distraction from other random signage which makes it difficult to process at the best of times when driving especially when driving in heavy rain. You are also entering the car park from a very busy road. I would have missed that Excel sign on entry.

There is a case about processing information where there is a lot of random signage. It is not a parking ticket case but it is relevant to this scenario.  

The formation of the contract on entry can be robustly defended in my opinion. The case that Excel will cite is totally irrelevant to this scenario.

Is this the kind of thing that I need to raise to them now or is it a case of wait until court? I’d really rather avoid court if possible. I’m a teacher, I don’t have annual leave to book so it wouldn’t go down well. 

Snakes_Belly

If you have had a letter before Claim, LBC you send a rebuttal letter in which you will robustly deny the claim. You can ask for sight of the landowner contract. 


If you have had the actual claim which will come from Northampton the process has started and you will need to follow the instructions on the Newbies thread. 

After you have acknowledge the claim (Keith advises on timescales). You will have so long to complete your defence in which you will include the legal reasons why the claim should be dismissed.

When you have a court date you will have so long to complete your witness statement which supports the defence.

At any time the Claimant can discontinue and this company are likely to take it to the brink.

Most of the hearings now are on the telephone so you may not have to attend court.

Naturally it would be better to get the ticket cancelled by the landowner but you still need to comply with the requirements of the process that has been started.  

Vanadesse

Snakes_Belly said:

If you have had a letter before Claim, LBC you send a rebuttal letter in which you will robustly deny the claim. You can ask for sight of the landowner contract. 


If you have had the actual claim which will come from Northampton the process has started and you will need to follow the instructions on the Newbies thread. 

After you have acknowledge the claim (Keith advises on timescales). You will have so long to complete your defence in which you will included the legal reasons why the claim should be dismissed.

When you have a court date you will have so long to complete your witness statement which supports the defence.

At any time the Claimant can discontinue and this company are likely to take it to the brink.

Most of the hearings now are on the telephone so you may not have to attend court.

Naturally it would be better to get the ticket cancelled by the landowner but you still need to comply with the requirements of the process that has been started.  

I need to put together my rebuttal for the LBC. Any further advice on points etc to make would be appreciated!