Backcester Lane, Lichfield, Excel Parking

Snakes_Belly

Fruitcake said:

It really needs a techie with something like a signal strength meter and a video camera, and someone willing to try to buy a ticket for a faux VRM to prove it is possible to enter a VRM for a vehicle not present, and even to enter a VRM that is not in the DVLA's database.
Does anyone have an overseas registered vehicle?

I think that the Lichfield car parks that are managed by Excel will be under new management within a few days. 

Stefano123

Hi Folks 

I've completed a draft of my WS. Do I post here for feedback?

Thanks!

Le_Kirk

Stefano123 said:

Hi Folks 

I've completed a draft of my WS. Do I post here for feedback?

Thanks!

Yes, you can.

Stefano123

Do I do that here?

KeithP

Stefano123 said:

Do I do that here?

@Le_kirk has already answered that, but make sure you remove all detail from it that identifies you.

Either post on the thread or host on dropbox and give us a link to it.

Stefano123

1.     The matters referred to in this witness statement are within my own knowledge, except where stated otherwise.

2.     On 14 April 2021, I left my home address and set out for Three Spires Shopping Centre Short Stay Car Park as I have done countless times before. Owing to the pandemic and national lockdowns, it had been some time since I had used this carpark. Thus, at the time I left my home, I was completely unaware that Excel Parking Services Limited had taken over the management of the site from Lichfield District Council. I contend this information is relevant for context later in this statement.

3.     At the time of the alleged contravention, the Claimants had been operators at this site for less than 8 weeks. Moreover, lockdown guidance and restrictions were still firmly in place at the time and so, given the atypicality of the usual order of things during the pandemic, I would contend this makes the need to display sufficient signage at the entrance to and around the carpark even more important than usual.

4.     As is evidenced by the photographs (Exhibit), I encountered completely insufficient signage at the entry of the car park. There is also insufficient signage displayed along the very short route I took once inside the car park to the space in which I parked my car (Exhibit). Thus, the terms of any alleged contract were not clearly visible at the entrance of the carpark nor whilst sat in my vehicle, stationary, immediately after stopping in a designated bay very close to the insufficient signs at the entrance.

5.     I was thus entirely unaware that the parking operator, method of payment and parking contract at this site had changed. Moreover, regardless of my familiarity with the car park or otherwise, the signage is so poor at the site that new users would need a generous Consideration Period to understand any terms of a contract that the Claimant alleges exists.

6.     When I stopped the vehicle, I immediately went to my phone to use the “PayByPhone” app, which was the method of payment I had always used prior when Lichfield District Council managed the site (Exhibit ). Given the signage was so poor, it had failed to do all that was reasonable to alert returning customers of a change of operator and thus I was flummoxed as to why I could not find the location number for Three Spires Shopping Centre Short Stay Car Park on the “PayByPhone” app. I then proceeded to delete the app and reinstall it a few times in the hope it may be a server or connection error. In total, I estimate this took circa 5-8 minutes. When it became apparent the reinstall had not caused the location number to reappear, I got out of my car to investigate. 

7.     It was at that this point I became aware of the new signage next to the ticket machine, indicating a change of management and new parking terms and conditions. Given I read the terms and conditions and attempted to comply with them, it cannot be the case I am deemed to have accepted them immediately.

8.      Patting myself down, I realised I had no change on me, so I returned to my car to check for loose change. Given the pandemic, the infrequency with which I would leave my house and the refusal of most vendors to accept cash at that time, I discovered I had no cash in the car.

9.     At 13:05 I attempted to pay £2 for parking via contactless payment (Exhibit). I made several attempts to pay. The machine did not give me any notification that the payment had been accepted nor rejected. The machine’s digital display did not communicate a payment failure, nor did it produce a void receipt, which means I could not have known for sure whether payment had failed or not. It was not until I gathered evidence from my bank, several months later, I finally became aware my attempt to pay was rejected at 13:08 (Exhibit) - some 3 minutes after the bank first received notification of a payment attempt.

10.  Given on the day I was unsure of whether the payment was successful or not, and knowing the predatory behaviour of car parking operators, I decided to try the second method of payment offered on the sign just to be sure. I thus navigated to the website www.connectcashlessparking.com via my iPhone 11 Pro, which the Claimant alleges was available.  

11.  When the site was loaded on my mobile web browser, I was presented with a website designed for desktop. It does not offer a site optimised for mobile. Viewing this on a 5.85inch screen, the tiny text made it incredibly difficult to use/ see/ read the website and thus takes time to navigate. On the day in question, it was also raining, making things more difficult as rain splashed on my screen. Having eventually found the registration page and after attempting to create an account several times, I was greeted by the error message: “There was an error. Please Go back to try again”. I attempted to register again on several occasions. I estimate this took 3-6 minutes. Despite my best efforts, I continued to encounter the same error message whilst trying to sign up (Exhibit).

12.  Given by this time I had tried to make payment in two different ways, having made several attempts with each method, wanting to get on with my lunch break, and recognising I had no cash to try the ticket machine again, I left the car park in good faith. 

13.  As is evidenced most clearly by my attempts to pay I had every intention of parting with £2 to validate a parking event. I refute automatically incurring an exaggerated fine because (a) the Claimant’s signage, payment instructions and processes were unclear and (b) their systems were faulty and flawed.  I believed the exhibits to this witness statement evidence the same.   

14.  All things considered, under the circumstances, it is evident that the 18 minutes, between 12:55 and 13:14, the Claimant alleges I spent on site clearly constitute what the International Parking Community’s (“IPC”) Accredited Operator Scheme Code of Practice (2021) refers to as “a sufficient Consideration Period” (Exhibit). The IPC’s Marking the Lines document (2019) expands (Exhibit):

“A Consideration Period is a non-contractually binding period of time given to a motorist to read Terms and Conditions on car park signage. A motorist must be given adequate time to acquaint themselves with the Terms and Conditions of a car park so they can make an informed choice about whether they wish to park their car there.

This needs to apply to all private land. However, what constitutes a reasonable Consideration Period will vary depending on the situation and the nature of the land. What constitutes a fair and effective Consideration Period will also depend on the situation. For example, the approach to a No Stopping zone will be different to a private car park where parking is invited”.

15.  To this end, the Claimant’s signage on site (Exhibit), which states “after a vehicle has entered the car park a maximum period of 10 minutes is allowed to purchase a valid ticket or make payment by phone or online”, is dishonest, misleading and contravenes the IPC’s published guidance above, which does not stipulate any set time limit. Moreover, this not only contradict guidance from the IPC it also entirely contradicts the Claimant’s PCN, which I was sent, the same states, “0 minutes” is the allowed time (Exhibit).

16.  Under the terms set out in the IPC’s Code of Practice (2021), 18 minutes was an entirely reasonable amount of time to have spent on site at Three Spires Shopping Centre Short Stay Car Park, given the “situation” (i.e. imposition of strict lockdown guidance, the grave and incomparable disruption caused by the COVID19 pandemic, the change of operator, weather conditions, inadequate signage, not least the clear and evidenced failure of the Claimant’s payment systems on the day).

17.  I contend therefore it is entirely unreasonable, unfair and excessive to expect me to try every available means of payment offered by the Claimant until one happens to work, especially when the first two methods offered by the operator failed in quick succession.

18.  Failed payments at this machine have been a common complaint since the arrival of my PCN (Exhibit). Thus there is evidently a known fault with the ticketing machine at this site as numerous complaints are being made about it (Exhibit) on: https://uk.trustpilot.com/review/www.excelparkingservices.co.uk.

19.  Such are the issues at Three Spires Shopping Centre Short Stay Car Park since Excel Parking Service Limited have taken over this site, a petition has been set up calling for the site to be returned to Lichfield District Council’s stewardship (Exhibit): https://www.change.org/p/three-spires-shopping-centre-car-park-returned-to-council. Over 1,000 people have taken the time to sign the same and many have commented on the unethical practice engaged in by the Claimant.  I wish to draw the following to the attention of the Court:-

 

“I know I paid but I can’t prove it with no ticket … I paid in cash, I remember where I went shopping as well makes my blood boil I have never not paid in my life”

 

“I've been caught out by Excel who are bullying me with threatening letters of CCJ's & I paid!! Ticketless machine!!”

                       

“I hate to see people getting ripped off and this is one of the worst parking scams I've seen in a while. Shame on Excel for taking advantage of honest motorist.”

 

“I got fined as ticket machine mot [sic] working”

 

“Machine never issued a ticket” (Exhibit )

 

“I paid £4 for ticketless parking … Ticket machine wasn’t [sic] working” (Exhibit )

 

“This machine is ticketless so I have no proof” (Exhibit )

 

20.  The outrage created locally about the Claimant’s behaviour at this site, as well as their lack of interest in engaging with customers in such matters, has resulted in the owners of the site ending their contract with the Claimant: https://lichfieldlive.co.uk/2022/06/12/decision-by-shopping-centre-owner-to-end-contract-with-car-parking-company-welcomed-by-lichfield-mp/. I wish to draw to the attention of the Court, the following comments from the local MP, Michael Fabricant (Exhibit ):-

 

“This is seriously good news – I have never before had to deal with a company that has so little interest in engaging with genuine concerns of the customers it is meant to serve.

 

“Even when I have taken up miscarriages of justice with the company concerning constituents who have been served parking penalty notices by them because their machines were faulty, they have shown no interest in righting obvious wrongs.

“Good riddance to a company that damaged the good name of Lichfield by their unwillingness to engage with the community. Their lack of engagement is a testimony to how a company should not be run.

 

“I feel sorry for other towns who have to endure them.”

 

21.  Before this claim was bought against me, I made appeals to both the Claimant and to the Independent Appeals Service, showing willingness to settle this dispute before litigation.

 

22.  It is for all of the reasons above, I contest the highly egregious sum of £160 the Claimant is attempting to recover, as well as the costs they are attempting to bully me into paying and ask the Court to dismiss this claim without merit.

Statement of Truth

 

23.  I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

 

 

Snakes_Belly

That scrappy notice at the bottom of the sign is all that alerts a motorist to the fact that the terms and conditions have changed.

Snakes_Belly

In the WS I would refer to the comments and fact the several MP's are involved in the numerous claims generating from this car park.  Michael Fabricant the incumbant MP for Lichfield and Amanda Milling Minister of State for Asia and the Middle East and MP for Cannock Chase have both intervened in claims made by Excel however Excel have been intransigent in their stance.

I would  type the comments onto a separate piece and paginate them as part of the bundle. 

I would do the same with the petition. Mention it and then type the comments onto a separate piece of paper and paginate as part of the bundle.    

Presentation is important as the Excel bundle will be a mess of irrelevant rubbish.

Stefano123

Snakes_Belly said:

In the WS I would refer to the comments and fact the several MP's are involved in the numerous claims generating from this car park.  Michael Fabricant the incumbant MP for Lichfield and Amanda Milling Minister of State for Asia and the Middle East and MP for Cannock Chase have both intervened in claims made by Excel however Excel have been intransigent in their stance.

I would  type the comments onto a separate piece and paginate them as part of the bundle. 

I would do the same with the petition. Mention it and then type the comments onto a separate piece of paper and paginate as part of the bundle.    

Presentation is important as the Excel bundle will be a mess of irrelevant rubbish.

OK I've screenshoted the comments from the Lichfield Live article and then put a red box around them as part of my final exhibit. 

A friend of mine is a solicitor so he's been helping me with the formatting.

Yeah, I've received their WS, which my friend says doesn't address my defence and is rubbish.

Thanks a lot!   

Snakes_Belly

"A friend of mine is a solicitor so he's been helping me with the formatting."

That's great. Judges like a neat bundle that they are not searching through for information.