Claimant filed >£700 for 3 Parking Invoices issued in 2016

PODE001

Original telephone court date postponed in May and I had a new re-scheduled date for today for in person. We won - with some costs awarded!

All a bit of a whirlwind but main points:-

1. The Judge was not satisfied to strike out on abuse of process.
2. Accepted D's evidence that on the balance of probability there was only 1 PCN issued rather than the 3 claimed by the C (UK Parking) - and pointed to the fact the C's letter of claim included 5 PCNs which shows factually inconsistent evidence. On that basis the C could only sue for 1 PCN.
3. The C's signage did not purport to charge per day for any breach in parking, therefore the most C could claim if the D's parking was unauthorised, was for one instance in this case.
4. The Judge disregarded my argument that the Claimant did not have authority to enforce parking that even though the owner was unknown, the agent of the owner was entitled to contract with the C to enforce parking. Balance of probabilities.
5. However agreed that the C failed to show the agreement with the managing agent was in place at the time the PCN was issued to the D, as the contract referenced start date 2014 "for an initial period of 12 months". It is to the claimant to prove the period - the claimant has failed to show there was agreement in place in July 2016.
6. C's evidence re signage is poor.
Evidence is defective – the aerial photo is inaccurate as shows no signs to be erected in the parking area. We know from the defendant’s photo, signage is placed by the car and this throws doubts over accuracy of evidence.
Open to doubt if the text provided on an example of the parking sign provided by the C, is on the actual signage as illegible photos of signage provided from the PCN date. Claimants case fails on this.
7. The Judge was not satisfied that I could prove primacy of contract with the person I had rented the space from.

Find for the D due to inability to read the terms of parking due to the size on actual signage, and no agreement in place as at the point the PCN was issued. 

Costs for unreasonable litigation were not awarded but I did receive for loss of earnings and travel costs.

Thank you for everyone's help and all those involved in laying out the steps to follow. I needed a crib sheet prepared and to be ready to talk to each point, but the information on here helped me greatly in feeling more comfortable. Trust the process.

(It was also commented on by the Judge that he appreciated the bundle layout and referencing and wished the C could follow this approach. :-D )
 

Umkomaas

Nice result and thank you for your excellent court report. 👍

Would it be possible please to tell us the court venue, the Judge's name and the case reference number?

Coupon-mad

That is brilliant news, very well done!

ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST!

Keep all the paperwork because it sounds like there were 5 PCNs (so they thought, at LBC stage) and yet they 'only' sued over three.  Don't be surprised if the C might try another claim for two more later on. You need to keep everything, just in case, as it might make it easier.

Please come back in a few weeks to do the Public Consultation. Your experience and opinion needs to be heard by Government.

Set up email alerts for this forum and bookmark this thread (below) as we intend that one of us posts on it when the Government opens the Consultation:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6333989/mse-parking-ticket-appeals-guide-feedback#latest

We need to stop the rotten industry from stamping all over the new statutory Code and charge levels, and adding false 'fees' to make more money.

Motorists must be heard, to stop litigation being the 'first resort'. Currently, as you know, there is a whole greedy parasite industry piggybacking on the PPC bandwagon and they need to be disincentivised, to clean up the whole operation.