Parking Eye County Court Claim filed - Payment Made but no reciept given by PADM

Le_Kirk

Is it to be a court mediation or an independent mediator?  Have you submitted witness statements to the court yet?  If not, when you do, just inform the court that you will a Lay Rep.

KeithP

I think I have read that you cannot be both a witness and a lay representative, but I have nothing authoritative to quote.

Le_Kirk

KeithP said:

I think I have read that you cannot be both a witness and a lay representative, but I have nothing authoritative to quote.

I cannot find any directions one way or the other but it is a valid point @KeithP.  To the OP, why are you a witness?

Umkomaas

we opted for mediation

How much are you prepared to pay PE?

will it be an issue if am a witness and also her Lay Rep?

Sorry, I can't give you a definitive answer on that, try a Google search. 

How do we notify the court of intensions to be the Lay Rep? 

Just on the day. Make sure you have a copy of this to hand:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1999/1225/made

Be aware that there is another form of assistance that can be provided to the Defendant - a McKenzie Friend - so it will be useful to understand the scope of each with a bit of Googling in preparation. We have seen a couple of cases where the judge has asked in which capacity (of the two) are you looking to act. It might save you a few hums and hahs.

1505grandad

C-m posted the following on a thread in 2019:-

Le_Kirk

1505grandad said:

C-m posted the following on a thread in 2019:-

Good searching skills @1505grandad

chijiokeike

Umkomaas said:

we opted for mediation

How much are you prepared to pay PE?

will it be an issue if am a witness and also her Lay Rep?

Sorry, I can't give you a definitive answer on that, try a Google search. 

How do we notify the court of intensions to be the Lay Rep? 

Just on the day. Make sure you have a copy of this to hand:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1999/1225/made

Be aware that there is another form of assistance that can be provided to the Defendant - a McKenzie Friend - so it will be useful to understand the scope of each with a bit of Googling in preparation. We have seen a couple of cases where the judge has asked in which capacity (of the two) are you looking to act. It might save you a few hums and hahs.

I was listed as a witness due to the conversation I had with Her on the date of parking where I advised her to find another means to pay for parking so She would have proof of payment, and because the initial PCN was issued to me as the keeper. It made sense at the time to put myself down as a witness, so I could attend the court with Her

I did not realize mediation meant I had to pay. It was offered by the court, I felt it was the right thing to do. If I refuse to make any payment following mediation, I take it the case goes to a full trial?

I will look into the McKenzie Friend as it's looking like Lay Rep might not work.

Finally, do I have to write a witness statement of my own and submit it to the court ahead of the hearing?

KeithP

I have just re-read the whole thread to try and understand what benefit there is in you being a Witness. I failed.

You also state that you are 'listed as a witness'. How does that happen?
My understanding was that the Defendant only has to state the number of witnesses - not names.

From reading the thread I get the impression that you would be better positioned as a Lay Representative rather than a McKenzie Friend. Remember, a MKF can only guide the Defendant on what to say, not speak on their behalf. But that's a choice for you two to make between you.

I would suggest that you and your wife concentrate on getting her Witness Statement and evidence in good order and maybe even not bothering to turn up at the mediation hearing.

And to answer your final question... to be heard as a witness by the court, every witness must supply a witness statement.

chijiokeike

KeithP said:

I have just re-read the whole thread to try and understand what benefit there is in you being a Witness. I failed.

You also state that you are 'listed as a witness'. How does that happen?
My understanding was that the Defendant only has to state the number of witnesses - not names.

From reading the thread I get the impression that you would be better positioned as a Lay Representative rather than a McKenzie Friend. Remember, a MKF can only guide the Defendant on what to say, not speak on their behalf. But that's a choice for you two to make between you.

I would suggest that you and your wife concentrate on getting her Witness Statement and evidence in good order and maybe even not bothering to turn up at the mediation hearing.

And to answer your final question... to be heard as a witness by the court, every witness must supply a witness statement.

@KeithP, that is a correct and useful point actually, it's the number (2) that was provided, not the names of the witness. As I am advancing in my understanding of legal proceedings, I have come to realize, there is no benefit to me being a witness for Her.

 I will take your advice and not include a witness statement so that I can stand in as a Lay Rep if required.

 

 

 

 

 

chijiokeike

Witness Statement of XXXXXXXX

 

1.                   I am Mrs XXXXXXXXX of XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX and I am the defendant against whom this claim is made. The facts below are true to the best of my belief and my account has been prepared based upon my knowledge.

2.                   In my statement I shall refer to exhibits within the evidence supplied with this statement, referring to page and reference numbers where appropriate. My defence is repeated, and I will say as follows

Sequence of Events on XXth Sept 2020

3.                   On the XXth of September 2020 at around 09:15 am, I parked at the car park, as I was attending an Exam at Pitman Training Centre, 2nd Floor, Richmond House, Bloom Street M1 3HZ. The exam was scheduled to start at 09:3Xam (see exhibit XXXXX).

4.                   On parking my car reg XXXXX, I approached the PADM. Following the instructions, I made a payment of £6 to cover a 3-hour stay. On requesting receipt of payment from the PADM, none was issued. I pressed the coins return button multiple times, but the coins were not returned. It is important to note that this was not my first time using this car park or PADM, see Paragraph 20 to 25 below.

5.                   I looked around for a parking attendant and none was available. There was also no means to request help via the PADM. After a couple of minutes of playing with the machine to see if I could get my money back, I gave up. I did not have any spare coins on me as I had come prepared with just the right amount to make payment for my parking session, so could not make another payment. I had no choice but to leave my car parked in the car park as I would be late for my exam if I kept waiting around for a parking attendant. My plan was to return later and get help from a parking attendant to resolve the issue.

6.                   At around 11 am on XXth Sept 2020. I returned to the car park as planned. I still was not able to find a parking attendant. I then proceeded to call my Husband (XXXXXXX) to get advice on what to do. He advised asking any other car park users if there is another method of making payment. I spoke to another car park user and they showed me how to make the payment online. However, the online payment could not be back timed. I then proceeded to make a payment for the remaining time I planned to spend at the car park so that I could have some proof of payment. Time paid online was for 2 hrs (see exhibit xxxx)

7.                   At around 12 pm on XXth Sept 2020, I exited the car park. In total, payments made to Parking Eye were £10.70, £6 via PADM, and £4.70 online. This is enough to cover a 9 hrs stay at the car park, however, time spent at the car park was less than 3 hrs.

PCN and Appeals

8.                   Initial PCN for £100 was issued by parking eye to my Husband (XXXXXX) on XX/10/20 as He is the registered keeper of the vehicle. My Husband appealed the charge stipulating the sequence of events as above.

9.                   On the 22/10/2020 ParkingEye replied requesting the driver’s/defendant’s details. My husband replied providing my details

10.               On 12/11/2020 ParkingEye re-issued the £100 PCN in my name. I appealed stipulating the sequence of events as above (see exhibit XXXXXX)

11.               On the 18/12/2020 ParkingEye replied rejecting the appeal stating, “Our records show that insufficient time was PAID for on the date of the parking event”. The reply did not state what “Records” were used and what “insufficient Time” was. All PCN’s issued to date were for a parking time of 2hrs 40 mins.

12.               None of ParkingEye’s communication up till this point date acknowledged the online payment or the unreceipted PADM payment.

13.               I appealed the case through POPLA. On XX/06/2021, a decision was made in favour of ParkingEye with the Assessor stating “POPLA’s remit is to assess the validity of the PCN, whilst I do sympathise with the appellant and appreciate, they were in no way trying to avoid payment, it’s clear they only paid for 2 hrs and remained on site for 2hrs 40 mins”.

14.               It is clear from above that POPLA remit is to make decisions based only on the evidence provided by both parties at the time of appeal. There is no onus put on either party to provide any evidence to counter/support statements made by the other.

15.               No requirement was made by POPLA for ParkingEye to verify the previous parking Event on XX/08/20 for VRN XXXXXX and whether a payment was made, by what means and how much.

16.               No requirement was made by POPLA for ParkingEye to present the PADM collections/payments on XX/09/2020 and to compare these against receipted amounts.   

17.               No requirement was made by POPLA for ParkingEye to use the available footage from the ANPR camera to check activity at the site and in front of the PADM between 09:1X and 11:5Xam on XX/09/20.

18.               Following POPLA’s disappointing decision. It became clear to me that the only way to resolve this issue and get a full and just hearing of my case was to await a court claim from ParkingEye.

Court Claim and Subject Access Request

19.               On XX/08/2021, ParkingEye entered a claim against me, which I acknowledged on XX/08/2021.

20.               On XX/09/2021 I made a SAR to ParkingEye. The request was as follows below

a)       ALL photos taken - all letters/emails sent and received, including any appeal correspondence earlier (including POPLA appeal correspondence)

b)      PDT machine record from the date of PCN issue, of payments made (VRNs can be partially redacted).

c)       Receipt/Accounts showing monies collected from above PADM machine to cover PADM record period above for the date PCN was issued

d)      Video from the ANPR CCTV to cover the first 30 minutes of car entry to the premises on the date of PCN issue

e)      all data held, all evidence you will rely on, and a full copy of the PCN, NTK

f)        ANPR record for entry and exit to the same car park by VRN XXXXXX on XX/08/2020

g)       PDT machine record from XX/08/2020 to cover period parked for XXXXXX

h)      a list of all other PCNs outstanding against me for VRN XXXXXX

21.               On XX/10/2021, ParkingEye replied supplying only a), b) and e). Note however that PADM record provided at the time only covered (i.e. b above) only covered the period of 09:2X to 17:4X on XX/09/2020, as opposed to the time period covered in their exhibit submission.

22.               I replied ParkingEye on XX/09/20 insisting all information requested by submitted.

23.               ParkingEye responded stating “Please note that a Request for Access only entitles you to information about, or copies of, your own personal data. On this basis, the more general requests you have made for documentation, such as for a copy of PADM records and CCTV, will not fall within the remit of our response and such documentation will not be provided within our response”.

24.               It is important to note that all information with relation to VRN XXXXXX can be classed as my personal data as ParkingEye has verified with DVLA that the registered keeper is my Husband’s and have verified with my Husband that I drive the vehicle. According to their own statement, they should be providing me with the records of any entries, PCN’s and payments made for VRN XXXXX.

25.               If ParkingEye had produced details with relation to XXXXXX from XX/08/20, this would have shown my track record of making payment in full on entry to the same car park and familiarity with the PADM machine. I used this car park on said date to attend the Life in UK exam at Richmond House (see exhibit xxx)

26.               ParkingEye also stated in the same response that “Parkingeye operate using ANPR cameras, not CCTV cameras. Therefore, we are unable to review or supply you with any video footage. We only capture still images of vehicles entering and exiting the car park. Any CCTV in the area, around or covering the site is not operated by Parkingeye and we have no access to the same if any exists.”.

27.               It is important to note that ANPR (Automatic Number Plate Recognition) Technology, is a technology that runs off CCTV hardware. It’s designed to filter out background noise and lighting in order to give a clear image of a car’s number plate, while at the same time scanning the number plate using optical character recognition and uploading it to the database of the users choice. This does not mean the CCTV owner does not have the ability to go back into the records of the CCTV hardware and obtain footage if they choose to. The ANPR camera at Bloom street points to the entrance where the PADM is located (see exhibit XXX). A review of this footage would show payment being made at the machine around 9:1Xam.

28.               ParkingEye refused to provide collections/accounts and receipts issued for the same period from the PADM on XX/09/20. A review of this would show a discrepancy between amounts collected and receipted to the tune of £6

Signage at Car Park and ParkingEye’s claims to be a binding contract

29.               On XX/01/2021, I returned to the car park to review and take photographic evidence of the signage which ParkingEye claims to form a binding contract on entry to the Bloom Street Car park.

30.               At the point of entry to Bloom Street Car park, the entrance terms, and conditions sign is not visible, readable, or in direct line of sight for the driver. The only viewable signage on entry is the “Tariffs Payable” and the “P” sign on the PADM at the entrance (exhibit xx-04). The Sign at the entrance and on the PADM does not mention anything related to the risk of paying   £100.

31.               There are two signs that mention “Failure to comply with the terms and conditions will result in a Parking Charge (£100)”. These words are only easily legible on one sign, but this sign is at the corner of the car park and faces away from the car park, so would not be seen by a driver who has driven into the car park (see exhibit). The second sign is a lot less legible and is posted on the ANPR camera post. Furthermore, the second sign is well above eye level, positioned at the back of the car park. None of these signs was viewed/read on the day of parking.

32.               On both signs, the terms and Conditions are not easily legible. Hence there is no way of knowing what the provisions are in ParkingEye’s T&C’s for Payments made that were not receipted by ParkingEye.

33.               In this case, the signage fails to adhere to the standards laid out by the relevant accredited parking association, the International Parking Community ('IPC'). The IPC mandatory Code says that text on signage “should be of such a size and in a font that can be easily read by a motorist having regard to the likely position of the motorist in relation to the sign”. It also states that “they should be clearly seen upon entering the site” and that the signs are a vital element of forming a contract with drivers

34.               ParkingEye claim that by using the car park you automatically agree to pay a charge of £100 for not following their T&C’s. I never undertook such a contract, and however, dispute that such a contract becomes irrelevant if you have taken up another contract to make payments at the PADM machine.

35.               A review of the signage and instructions on the PADM message which is the only instructions read on the date of the parking event has no mention of Parking Charges to the Tune of £100 (see exhibit)

36.               The PADM machine also makes no provision to seek assistance in the event of monies being seized/not returned.