Check my defence? Issue date was 24th Nov

IdontknowwhereIam

Hi, I have done acknowledgment of service and I am using the standard template defence and I have changed points 2 and 3. I believe that's all I need to do, except sign and date it.

The carpark is on Sheffield Sidney Street, Sheffield S1 4RG if you need to refer to the signage I mention. It is a NCP carpark.

I have written this in point 3. Any suggestions? I think I need to send this by email by tomorrow.

Thanks

3. On entering the car park there seems to be a sign setting out conditions of parking, unfortunately this sign is not illuminated with any type of lighting, relying on borrowed light which is problematic at best and had the effect of making the conditions difficult to read. 

The same lighting problems applies to the rest of the signage and the location of the signage is also confusing and cluttered having no less than 4 different signs at the entrance to the car park of which the payment prices being one of the smallest of the 4 signs with the payment prices being extremely small and on the opposite side of the driveway, when considering you are in a car, driving in, the chance of this causing misunderstanding is extremely likely. This caused 3 adults to misread the sign as we had the understanding we had more parking time.

As we had entered at 18:54pm in March there was no natural light available.

The way the signs are situated which is on the opposite side of the direction of traffic would mean that to read the sign correctly you would have to dangerously half park on the road with your car sticking out into the road whilst you read the signs. Obviously you think you have read the signs correctly until you are hit with a parking charge notice.

Being a responsible person and being the designated driver whilst my friends enjoy alcoholic drinks, my friends offered to pay for the parking and I/we had relied upon this signage at the entrance to the car park only.

Furthermore the British Parking Association, of which National Car Parks Limited are a member of had, in their previous BPA Approved Operator Code of Practise 2012- Versions 7, January 2018 stated that:

 “You should allow the driver a reasonable period to leave the private car park after the parking contract has ended, before you take enforcement action. If the location is one where parking is normally permitted, the Grace Period at the end of the parking period should be a minimum of 10 minutes.”

This has since been updated in January 2020 and that particular condition has been removed which seems highly suspect and aimed towards capturing as much illegal parking charges as possible. I’m of the opinion that on a Wednesday night in a car park that is empty, allowing a grace period of 40+ minutes would be sensible.

I also do not think the ‘penalty’ is within a reasonable amount based on no loss of revenue being incurred by National Car Parks Limited. Simply, I believe they are trying to extort money from honest citizens by fabricating excessive charges.

Coupon-mad

Nope, too wordy and irrelevant.  Tell us what actually happened?

And the Date of issue if the claim, and exact date you did the AOS as well?

Redx

Too much information , keep the defence concise

The no loss argument died with the Barry Beavis case 6 years ago , unless you can prove in law that it was a penalty ?   ( Otherwise the penalty rule is not engaged )

There is absolutely zero argument about a 40 minutes grace period , other than a mechanical breakdown or medical emergency

Show us both 2 and 3 when you reply after redrafting your paragraphs

IdontknowwhereIam

Hi, thanks for replying.

I parked in the car park longer than I was allowed to because all 3 of us misread the sign. We thought we had 4 hours of parking but it seems that it was 3 hours.

Entered 18:54 and left 22:28

IdontknowwhereIam

Forgot to add.

Issue date on the n1 form is 24th November 2021 and I did the AOS on 30/11

Coupon-mad

And the answers to the questions I asked at the end of my post? I see the thread title has issue date but AOS date?

IdontknowwhereIam

I hadn't realised it was too wordy. I have cut the irrelevant bits out I think. It is my first time doing this so apologies for lack of knowledge.

The facts as known to the Defendant:

2.       It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle in question but liability is denied. 

The Defendant admits to being the driver.

 

3. On entering the car park the signage is difficult to read as it does not have it own illumination and it is on the opposite side of the driveway making the conditions of parking and prices easily misread. The signage is relying on borrowed light and positioned as such that parking to read is dangerous due to the road. 

IdontknowwhereIam

Coupon-mad said:

And the answers to the questions I asked at the end of my post? I see the thread title has issue date but AOS date?

Issue date on the n1 form is 24th November 2021 and I did the AOS on 30/11

Thanks

Coupon-mad

Add that all occupants of the car read the sign as offering 4 hours parking and the Claimant is put to strict proof that, on the material date, it did not offer this.

IdontknowwhereIam

Coupon-mad said:

Add that all occupants of the car read the sign as offering 4 hours parking and the Claimant is put to strict proof that, on the material date, it did not offer this.

Perfect, I will add that to it. Not sure how they would prove this and it might be too much hassle?

Thanks

Coupon-mad

Yep, you got it.  That's the point!