[Help] Parking vultures court claim received

Umkomaas

they will look to expose this via cross examination.

Standard template stuff designed to intimidate. There won't be any adversarial 'cross examination'. It will be a discussion of the facts, via the Judge.

GingerBeardOwner

Thought as much, this isn't quite Depp Vs Heard. 

I've no doubt they will still seek to mediate prior to the the hearing.

Any recommendations for good examples of cribs sheets and peoples experiences of what happened to them in court?

Umkomaas

peoples experiences of what happened to them in court?

Do a forum search on 'ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST' as we place that 'tag' on all successful court cases. There'll be hundreds. 

HOW TO USE THE MSE SEARCH FUNCTION MOST EFFECTIVELY

The forum search function is powerful, if a bit clunky if using for the first time, so please read the following thread to help walk you through the various steps you'll need to take to get best results. 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6289402/weve-updated-the-search-function/p1

GingerBeardOwner

Unfortunately i have to share that i am one of the 1%. 

Ill post later with as much as i can remember, for now if anyone has any direct questions ill try and answer them when posting. 
Cheers

Coupon-mad

That's a real shame, given you were presumably at a car park in the West Country, as you said it was Premier Park who mainly operate there.

You said in December:

Early 2019 PCN issued for failure to pay for duration of stay (machine only let me input some digits of VRM, paid for longer than I stayed, displayed ticket in window, left within paid time period)

Appealed to Parking Vultures to point out that machine at fault...

We know that there are machines (used by some PPCs and seen recently in the West Country) that only allow you to type in 3 digits:
https://wstpost.com/visitors-to-cornish-beauty-spots-receive-100-parking-fines-despite-having-paid-and-exhibited/

So, if they've won in court by causing this error themselves by using a machine that only allows 3 digits to be keyed in, then it is a complete injustice.

GingerBeardOwner

Claim number H8DP8W5W Leicester County Court 26/08/22 Premier Park/BW Legal

 

Their solicitor (first name Raj didn't catch his surname, not from BW Legal) asked to mediate prior, I said no thank you.

 

Start of hearing judge (lady called CJ or DJ Booth) asked Raj if he'd had 'any joy outside' referring to mediation to which he said no, judge didn't seem too impressed with that.

 

Solicitor made reference to a ‘weighty bundle’, and told the judge he wouldn’t labour her by going over old ground, I believe referring to most of my bundle.  He focused on 2-3 paragraphs of my witness statement only.

 

Their solicitor mainly focused on the signage being clear and obvious and I definitely had seen it which I disagreed with each time.

 

I took issue with their machine not working and the signage they alleged was up on the day wasn’t clear as shown in their evidence, (photo evidence was poorly printed and was of signs that were dirty, ripped and covered in paint and graffiti)

 

I stood firm that I'd paid for the duration of my stay which the claimant said via post that it was a payment they couldn't allocate until I filed a SAR and saw a log showing I had indeed paid.

 

My witness was questioned and of course backed up my version of events as he was there, referred to my final 3 VRN digits being the better part of the VRN which their solicitor argued 3 of the 7 digits wasn't the best half, to which my witness pointed out final 3 digits of a UK VRN are the important part, first 4 being location and year of registration to which he had no rebuttal.

 

I felt it was going well and that I'd argued my case well, pretty cut and dry in my opinion, I had indexed their bundle as they hadn’t, and multiple times I helped the judge find their evidence efficiently which the judge was happy with as their solicitor was struggling to find some parts.

 

Ultimately I lost on that although the judge was happy the machine was faulty on the day and that I clearly tried to pay, I could have used another machine, an app, called the company to report the issue or parked elsewhere to which I had pointed out during cross examination I wasn't part of their maintenance team and shouldn't have to go as far as reporting their machines defects.

 

Judge said the parking company because of me 'just going with 3 digits had incurred a cost'. I'd already pointed out the issue with some machines only requiring final 3 digits and a 30 second manual check by the parking company after my original appeal to explain what had happened had indeed allocated my payment and should have closed the PCN there and then, however they chose to tell me they couldn't allocate my payment and it was then their choice to send me letters and move my case to legal teams etc. at their expense for over 3 and a half years.

 

I was looking at one point paying £144 plus solicitor expenses of £169. Judge quizzed him on his costs and whittled him right down as he was from Coventry and it wasn’t the defendants fault he’d had to travel, parking firm could have used a solicitor from Leicester, judge then asked (I'm going to get this bit very wrong wrong) what regulation? the parking company where claiming expenses to which he said CRP9 or CRP7, maybe CRT9. Either way it was the wrong regulation. Needed to be CRP7 but they had selected CRP9 for example which meant I didn't have to cover his costs and he had to recover them from the Parking firm. 

 

I owed for 3 costs (£27 £35 and £50) plus the original settlement offer of £30. Parking firm wanted 8% interest to which the judge said no, I pointed out they had estimated 19% in their estimated costs letters, falsely inflating the final potential amount if this matter reached court, judge allowed 2%. So £27, £35, £50 and £32, £144 total, no solicitor fees. Tried the pay the amount online and I’m not able to as its passed to their legal team and one extra annoyance, all payment transactions require a £0.50 transaction fee. So not a great outcome as I now need to start chasing them. 

 

Make of the following what you will. I had a fairly open and frank chat with the solicitor after outside who said I'd done well as he almost always gets the £100. Said it was a simple breach of contract so easy win for him but id argued well and judge awarded less than normal. If we'd gotten this far and id tried to call the company on the day the infringement happened more than likely id have had a better outcome. Also some of my argument was referring to laws that are due to be changed but haven’t yet therefore aren’t relevant.

 

He said he got done himself by a company a while back and just paid the fine as knows how time consuming fighting these tickets can be. He also said that whenever he parks he always uses card/phone so there is a digital transaction never cash and always takes lots of photos of signs, car location, payment machine etc. before leaving just in case he does get done again.

 

Coupon-mad

Interesting report, thanks!  Not too shabby! 

The PCN was reduced back to £30.  They must be spitting feathers over that and are hugely out of pocket!  You paid less than was on the debt demands.

GingerBeardOwner

Coupon-mad said:

Interesting report, thanks!  Not too shabby! 

The PCN was reduced back to £30.  They must be spitting feathers over that and are hugely out of pocket!  You paid less than was on the debt demands.

Absolutely and the solicitor is going to be chasing them for his day out. £264 had eventually risen to £297 so ill take £144.

Plus it was an excuse for me and friend to have a few and some dinner in the city before getting the train home. I've had better days, ive also had far worse. Thanks to all who helped me along the way especially: @Coupon-mad@keithp @Umkomaas @Not_A_Hope @le-kirk

Hopefully a PPI type of thing appears only to claim back all these parking ticket fines

Stay safe and keep fighting the good fight.

Not_A_Hope

Shame the judge didn’t see through the scam and find against the PPC. I would find some solace that it cost them far more money to take you to court than they earned. You can also use your experiences and help get rid of all these parasites by making sure you comment on the upcoming consultation following the judicial review. That could really hurt them.

Coupon-mad

Not_A_Hope said:

Shame the judge didn’t see through the scam and find against the PPC. I would find some solace that it cost them far more money to take you to court than they earned. You can also use your experiences and help get rid of all these parasites by making sure you comment on the upcoming consultation following the judicial review. That could really hurt them.

Good point!

Now for your revenge, @GingerBeardOwner.  Please don't disappear just yet.

A final Public Consultation is coming.

We need you; motorists need you to help us make a difference forever.  What a waste of your time this was, and why should there be such a litigation culture in parking?   It's truly horrible being pursued for £100 plus false 'fees' for no reason, by an ex-clamper aggressive firm, isn't it? 

Join us in trying to end the conniving PPC and DRA 'added fees' fuelling the court culture. 

There will be one window of opportunity later this year.  My best guess is in October/November.

Together, we can stop the rotten parking industry from riding roughshod over the new statutory Code and the charge level caps, and otherwise bullying all motorists forever, using the regulation to gain kudos and status.

If you are not likely to pop back here every week to check, please 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

Read the latest posts there.

The PPC money-grabbers have blocked the new Code by filing for Judicial Reviews.  Stopped the declared and much welcomed parking code from February 2022, which stated that added £70 false 'DRA fee' extortion was to be banned and that parking levels would start at £50.

It's on hold. Motorists urgently need it reinstated and the ban on false 'DRA fees' confirmed, to stop the rot.

This year will be your chance to make a difference, plus any other drivers you know (family, friends) who are also fed up to the back teeth with the greedy and unscrupulous parking industry and the stranglehold they have on people.

We need high numbers of real victims to make a point of responding to this final Consultation