Dcbl letter before claim stage

Coupon-mad

UKPC are not in the IPC.

UKPC is not the claimant's stated name.

Cp100

Coupon-mad said:

UKPC are not in the IPC.

UKPC is not the claimant's stated name.

I couldn’t manage to find any option to go back 5 years. I have goggled how to do it with still no luck, I am using my iPhone. There is no option to change the date etc or year 

I found this current image which is a year old and they have these new signs up now. 

Coupon-mad

But if you do that on a laptop, you get the little box with date change arrow, top left, like I said.

You do not get that option on a teeny weeny phone screen.  Borrow a PC or laptop and all will be revealed.

KeithP

In September 2016 the car park looked like this...


[click on that image to go to GSV Sept 2016]

Look around. See if you can find an entrance sign.

aphex007

Coupon-mad said:

But if you do that on a laptop, you get the little box with date change arrow, top left, like I said.

You do not get that option on a teeny weeny phone screen.  Borrow a PC or laptop and all will be revealed.

Yeah using a smart phone you loose some of the google maps functionality, so as Coupon-mad suggests  Desktop PC or Laptop would be best.

Once in "Street View" mode click on the below (if available) and you may get the slider option to go back in time (as per below), if you are lucky!

aphex007

Or even easier just click on KeithP's image to take you direct to GSV for your car park in 2016

Cp100

Awesome thanks for the help. Is it worth putting in my WS that i struggle with reading long distances? And I wouldn’t of been wearing my glasses as I only wore them when driving? 

Also when I put the photos showing no entrance signs will they not just say the UKPC signs on the wall are pretty clear? Also what should I say about the lack of signage 5 years ago? Should I put the picture next to it from one year ago which shows the new house of fisher signage? 

Le_Kirk

Cp100 said:

Awesome thanks for the help. Is it worth putting in my WS that i struggle with reading long distances? And I wouldn’t of wouldn't have been wearing my glasses as I only wore them when driving? 

Also when I put the photos showing no entrance signs will they not just say the UKPC signs on the wall are pretty clear? Also what should I say about the lack of signage 5 years ago? Should I put the picture next to it from one year ago which shows the new house of fisher signage? 

I would not give the claimant any help and by saying you might struggle to read their signs you are doing just that!  I would, though, correct the grammatical error as shown. Use whichever of the photos show your case better.

Coupon-mad

Is it worth putting in my WS that i struggle with reading long distances? And I wouldn’t of been wearing my glasses as I only wore them when driving? 

Not if you are sticking to the suggestion you've already said in your draft WS, that there are 'several drivers of this car' (is that true?) and on each occasion there is no evidence who was driving OR THAT EACH NOTICE TO KEEPER HAD COMPLIANT POFA WORDING.

Yes put the image of the large warning entrance sign next to the 2016 image and go find the right version of the BPA Code of Practice from the right year, and quote the 'MANDATORY ENTRANCE SIGNS' section and say UKPC were in clear breach.  So much so, that the landowner themselves has had to commission their own warning sign since then because clearly the small print on walls was insufficient to draw terms to the attention of drivers believing this was the car park for the adjacent businesses.

Cp100

Coupon-mad said:

Is it worth putting in my WS that i struggle with reading long distances? And I wouldn’t of been wearing my glasses as I only wore them when driving? 

Not if you are sticking to the suggestion you've already said in your draft WS, that there are 'several drivers of this car' (is that true?) and on each occasion there is no evidence who was driving OR THAT EACH NOTICE TO KEEPER HAD COMPLIANT POFA WORDING.

Yes put the image of the large warning entrance sign next to the 2016 image and go find the right version of the BPA Code of Practice from the right year, and quote the 'MANDATORY ENTRANCE SIGNS' section and say UKPC were in clear breach.  So much so, that the landowner themselves has had to commission their own warning sign since then because clearly the small print on walls was insufficient to draw terms to the attention of drivers believing this was the car park for the adjacent businesses.

I have added this in there with the pictures..

As you can see from the image below from 2016 there was no entrance sign, I have also attached an image from 2020 which clearly proves UKPC were in clear breach, so much so that the landowner has had to commission their own warning sign since then because clearly the small print on walls was insufficient to draw terms to the attention of drivers believing this was the car park for the adjacent businesses.

15.      I quote from the BPA code of practice the following: 

Entrance signs play an important part in establishing a parking contract and deterring trespassers. Therefore,

as well as the signs you must have telling drivers about the terms and conditions for parking, you must also have a standard form of entrance sign at the entrance to the parking area. Entrance signs must tell drivers that the car park is managed and that there are terms and conditions they must be aware of. Entrance signs must follow some minimum general principles and be in a standard format. The size of the sign must take into account the expected speed of vehicles approaching the car park, and it is recommended that you follow Department forTransport guidance on this.