County Court claim - unallocated parking

ManaPotion

Note to mods - I have copied this thread over as I initially posted in the incorrect section of the motoring forum - hope that's okay!

Hi all, i've read through the newbies thread as well as a lot of other posts since I received this speculative invoice back in 2019.

Summary

Claimant - SIP Parking Limited
Claim - Unallocated parking as I parked in a numbered bay which was not included on the pay meter

We arrived at the carpark as we were staying at an airbnb around 5pm in October. It was a rainy day and very grey which made visibility poor. 
There were no signs on the entry to the car park which was accessed by numberpad.
As we parked we did check the parking meter which had numbers for bays where "pay and display was available" but because there were small yellow signs which looked like warnings dotted around the car park it made me unsure which bays were actually okay to park in.
I paid using the pay by phone app which made no mention of having to park in certain bays.

The ticket machine itself had no terms/conditions on it which I believe was a requirement for a contract to be established? We later realised that the small yellow signs dotted around were the ones that showed the terms/conditions.

I followed the newbie thread and followed most of the points but there are a few things which I never did.

I didn't complain to my MP and didn't know who to contact as landowner to try and get the charge cancelled.

I also haven't made an SAR to them because when the LBC came through I misremembered and thought that I just needed to wait for the actual small claims form to come through.

In between the LBC and the court claim, I have changed address. I had set up mail forwarding so I got all correspondence anyway and I updated my address when completing the AOS. Should I still make the SAR now and update my address with SIP?

The issue date for the claim was Dec 9th and I completed the AOS on the 21st Dec so I believe I have until 4pm tomorrow to send my witness defence to the court email?

I will comment again when I have completed the standard defence template but in the meantime I would appreciate any advice on how I should arrange my points if anyone is willing?

Redx

There are no forum moderators on mse , only board guides , not the same job description ( there have never been mods on this forum )

Yes issue a data rectification notice to the DPO at sip and an accompanying SAR request to , if not done already

Yes I think that 4pm tomorrow is your 33 day deadline

Post your proposed paragraphs 2 and 3 below for critique ( from the template defence by coupon mad in announcements at the top of the forum , first post ) , then we shall se what needs doing

KeithP

I agree. Your Defence filing deadline is tomorrow.

With a Claim Issue Date of 9th December, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Tuesday 11th January 2022 to file your Defence.

That's tomorrow.

To create a Defence, and then file a Defence by email, look at the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Don't miss the deadline for filing a Defence.

Do not try and file a Defence via the MoneyClaimOnline website. Once an Acknowledgment of Service has been filed, the MCOL website should be treated as 'read only'.

ManaPotion

Hi,

Apologies for the delay. Had to finish the work day. This is a fast rough draft to improve on but I thought it best to get something down first and make changes rather than try to make it perfect immediately.

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

3.  Upon arrival at the Albion Works Pollard Street the defendant noted that there were no parking instructions at the entrance to the car park. Visibility was poor as the weather was rainy and overcast. Parking was paid for via the Paybyphone app using the location code from the ticket machine. At the time, the defendant found it difficult to ascertain which parking spots were included on the ticket machines statement as the sign was ambiguously worded (available for pay and display means physical ticket? Paybyphone app was used therefore can use other bays?) and there were small yellow signs which resembled warnings in random places throughout the car park which cause the defendant to be unsure if parking was allowed in these bays. When paying through the paybyphone app, there was no mention of certain bays being available or unavailable for parking.

The ticket machine itself made no mention of any charges relating to incorrect parking and therefore it is denied that it was even possible to enter into a contract with the Claimant. Furthermore, a contract could not have been entered into without parking in one of the “bays available for pay and display” as there was no mention of parking being disallowed in these bays.

Can someone please advise if my logic is correct in that the full terms have to be set out on the actual ticket machine and not on tiny little signs randomly dotted around the car park? And also that because the sign says that "pay & display is available in bays:" and the allegation was that I parked in an "unallocated" bay anyway a contract could not have been formed anyway?

Would it help if I posted pictures of the sign from the car park?

Redx

If you paid for parking you definitely entered into a contract with somebody , regardless of the signage , even if the signs were poor and ambiguous

2) is ok

3) needs work

Ideally show us a Redacted photo of the PCN , a fully Redacted picture of the claim form , plus signage pictures etc

Ensure that no passwords or VRM details or PCN references or MCOL references are showing on the claim form pictures , nor your name and address , so absolutely no personal information , double check before posting 

What is the allegation ? No payment ? Overstay ? , Insufficient payment ? Who got the justpark money ? If you paid for parking then I don't see the error ?

ManaPotion

Redacted claim form
Redacted PCN slip This is the picture of the parking meter sign that SIP sent to me when I requested all pictures/info in the first dispute letter.

 Albion works entrance (no signage)



These are the yellow signs which were dotted around the car park. These contain the terms but there wasn't one near the actual parking meter, nor did the parking meter have any information relating to charges.

The allegation is that I didn't park in one of the bays specified on the meter so even though I paid, they now want their charge too. I believe the other bays are for residents. I don't know how it works when the residents have their own bays though, whether they are rented or owned etc.

Redx

Ok , so it's mainly a case of confusion by the contracted driver over which bay to use , the driver paid in full and parked in what they thought was a correct bay , only to subsequently find out that it wasn't one of the allocated bays detailed on the signage. The signs and bays caused confusion , but the matter is de minimis due to paying to park and trying to rely on inadequate signage , lord Dennings red hand rule is in favour of the driver defendant

No idea why you think that no contract was entered into , it occurred by parking and paying , offer , consideration and acceptance , a contract

ManaPotion

Upon arrival at the Albion Works Pollard Street the defendant noted that there were no parking instructions at the entrance to the car park. Visibility was poor as the weather was rainy and overcast. Parking was paid for in full via the Paybyphone app using the location code from the ticket machine. The defendant then parked in what they considered to be a correct bay, only to subsequently find out that it was not one of the allocated bays detailed on the signage. The signs and bays caused confusion as some yellow signs which resembled warnings were situated in random places throughout the car park and there was no indication on the bays themselves of whether it was an allocated bay for pay and display. This caused the defendant to be unsure if parking was allowed in these bays. When paying through the paybyphone app, there was no mention of certain bays being available or unavailable for parking. As the defendant paid the parking fee in full and only failed to park in the allocated bay due to inadequate signage, it is believed that this matter is de minimis.

ManaPotion

I've just updated my point 3 using what you wrote. Does this sound like it's on the right track? Is there anything else I should be looking to add or take away?

chanz4

I would also point out the cases throwing out the £60 extra charges

Coupon-mad

No because that's already covered by the template defence and no Judges throw out cases like that without a hearing any more.  That's old news.