Gladstones LBC letter

go-on-then

Nobody on here will tell you to pay anything so forget that.  With the expert help you can get on this forum you can beat this and keep your money where it belongs. In your pocket.

KeithP

Avol said:

Is it too much to ask which are the two paragraphs I need to change? Is it 2) and 3)? 

You should be able to answer that question yourself by re-reading the first few lines of the opening post on the template defence thread.

Here they are again...


Rarely do we see an entirely new question here. 

Avol

After spending around 4 hours reading through different cases of this forum, plus some of the statutory documents like the  Guidance on the new private parking code of practice , I have come to the conclusion that the only "tool" I may have to use in my Defence is the signage.
Just to refresh you about my situation, the ticket was issued in January 2021, while we were visiting our friend who, at the time, had recently moved in. We have parked our vehicle for about an hour, but it did not cross our mind that there was a private parking area, mainly because there was no clear signage in vicinity, but also due to the fact that it was around 21:00hrs and completely dark. We have seen the ticket upon returning to the car and it was quite a surprise for us, however due to the already known "abuse" of private car park companies I have ignored the letters which they started to arrive more than 6 months after the date of the alleged breach of parking conditions.


Based on this information I have two main dillemas:
1. Should I admit, within my Defence statement, that I was the driver or present in the car at the time? (FYI - the car was driven in by me and by someone else on return.

2. Like mentioned above, in my opinion the most solid argument I have would be the signage, in this situation can I use the Annex A from the new Code of Practice (see extract below) as reference. (from what I have understood this will not come in effect until 2023). Firstly there is no sign at the entrance, neither at the main entrance in the estate, nor at the entrance on the road where the ticket was issued. Secondly I have noticed that Table A.2 of the same Annex highlights clear specification of the wording, in my case it is a 15mph road after turning off a 30 mph road therefore the minimum capital height should be 60mm, and in reality is not even close. Additionally on the road are no more than 3-4 signs poorly placed with poor lighting and no retro-reflective material. (I have attached a couple of photos for reference) 

I am sorry to pester you but I need all your support. I am genuinely not very confident in creating my defence.

Annex A: Entrance signs

A.1 General

A.1.1 Signs at the entrance to a parking area must clearly show the type of parking available and if, when and how any payment is required to be made. If public parking is not welcomed, that must be made clear. If public parking is welcomed, but subject to a tariff, then the existence of the tariff must be made clear.

A.1.2 If one of the standard wordings in Table A.1 applies, then the standard wording should be used.

If none of the standard wording applies, alternative wording may be used. Words in square brackets may be omitted.

A.1.3 There should be at least one item from Group 1 in Table A.1 on the sign. However, no more than three items from Group 1 should appear before, and more prominently than, text from Group 2. The sign must state that terms and conditions apply and state where drivers can find more details (usually on other notices within the land).

A.1.4 If there are different payment terms for Blue Badge holders, such terms must also be displayed. The words “Blue Badge holders” should generally be replaced or accompanied by display of the Blue Badge symbol (exactly as shown in the Traffic Signs Regulations Guidance Document, not a local version

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Table A.1 – Entrance sign wording

Group 1	Group 2
Pay and display [except/free for Blue Badge holders]	Charges apply [after this] [after x minutes/hours]
[x minutes’/hours’] free parking [for {business name} customers only]	Private land
Pay on exit	Terms and conditions apply
Pay [on foot/at machine] when leaving	See the notice[s] [in the car park] for details
Parking for [business name] customers only
Permit holders only

A.2 Text size

A.2.1 The capital height for Group 1 text in Table A.2 depends on the approach speed of traffic. Group 2 text must be at least 50% of the size of Group 1 text. All other text must be smaller than 50% of the Group 1 text size.

The name of the car park or parking area, or a brief welcome message (if included), may be larger.

Table A.2 – Entrance sign text size

Situation	Typical approach speed (mph)	Minimum capital height for Group 1 text (mm)
Barrier control	under 10	50
Parking area entered immediately by turning off a 30 mph road	15	60
Car park entered from higher-speed road or using a length of access road	25	90
Service areas on motorways and dual carriageways	40	120

A.2.2 The sign should be placed so that it is readable by drivers without their needing to look away from the road ahead.

Any text on the sign not intended to be read from a moving vehicle can be of a smaller size.

Coupon-mad

Signage is the main base of every defence. Judges like it - nice and easy law - if you. An't see or read 'prominent' ( and they MUST be prominent) terms then a consumer can't be bound by them. 

Signs in the dark must be lit.

Both the existing APA codes of practice cover this requirement.  Not that photos go with a defence; they come later with your WS (see NEWBIES thread about 'What Happens When'.

Avol

Thanks @Coupon-mad
Yes I am aware that photos go with the WS, however I am anxious about all this, especially after I have seen other people with a quite comprehensive defence and WS and lost their cases.

Umkomaas

Avol said:

Thanks @Coupon-mad
Yes I am aware that photos go with the WS, however I am anxious about all this, especially after I have seen other people with a quite comprehensive defence and WS and lost their cases.

Glass half-full or half-empty there?  

It should be cup 90% full, 10% empty. Have confidence! 🙂

Avol

I have redacted a sketch of my Defence.. honestly I have been as natural and simplistic as possible, at the end of the day I am a lay person and don't want to give the impression that I am some king of law literate individual.@Coupon-mad

"

 

1.    The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.  It is denied that any conduct by the driver gave rise to a ‘parking charge’ and it is denied that this Claimant (understood to have a bare licence as managers) has standing to sue or to form contracts in their own name at the location.

 

 

      The facts as known to the Defendant:

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

3.    The vehicle XXX was briefly parked on XXX road, while the driver and his partner visited a friend, who had moved in the area only with a short period of time prior to the date of the alleged offence.

4.    This Claimant claims that this action was “in breach of the terms of parking stipulated on the signage (the Contract)“ however this is strongly denied by the defendant who is invoking the lack of clear, concise, legible and plentiful signage necessary at the site in order to legally form such a contract.

5.    It is noted that there is no signage available or visible, neither when driving from the main road onto XXX drive, which constitutes the main entrance to the residential estate of which the Claimant declares they have the right to impose their Contract, nor there is a sign placed specifically at the entrance on XXX, the street where the alleged parking offence had occurred.  There are however no more than 3-4 signs sporadically placed for the whole length of the street where the vehicle was parked and in the Defendant’s opinion, most of them being “strategically” placed on the building next to other residential signage, all with the same white background colour and very small letters describing the terms and conditions, in order to induce confusion to motorists unfamiliar with the area. There was also noted a particular sign placed on a post at the very end of the street of which text is hardly visible due to being obstructed by a tree.

6.    In relation to signage, the newly Government published Private Parking Code of Practice on 7th February 2022, clearly sets out the requirements for parking operators when enforcing restrictions. One of the key components of this promising Code of Practice is the requirements for higher standards for signage and surface markings, more specifically in Annex A: Entrance signs, Table A.2 which clearly defines the mandatory sign test size (i.e. “In a parking area entered immediately turning off a 30 mph road, the minimum capital height for Group 1 text should be 60 mm”). It is to be noted that existing signs at XXX are far from meeting these requirements.

7.    It is understood that all parking operators are expected to update processes and procedures as quickly as possible and will need to fully adhere to the Code ahead of the launch of the single parking appeals service in 2024. Nevertheless, the introduction of the new requirements enumerated within the new Code, especially those with reference to signage and surface markings which are more relevant in the Defendant’s case, imply the unlawful and unethical methods of using illegible small prints used by most of private parking operators on the parking signs and as Minister Neil O’Brien states, there should “be no wriggle-room for rogue companies who continue to flout the rules”.

8.    It is essential to be noted that the Claimant’s visit at their friend, who resides at the residential estate and which resulted in the current Parking Charge Notice took place in a late January evening thus in dark conditions and as a result of a lack of both, sufficient lighting and clarity of signage, the terms and conditions of the contract can easily go unnoticed.  

Coupon-mad

Looks good!

I think for conciseness and so it flows better, I'd move #8 up to replace your #5, and keep that #5 for WS stage, when you get to tell the story in more detail.

offence = change to 'parking event'.  It's not an offence nor a fine, none of that language applies.

1505grandad

"8.    It is essential to be noted that the Claimant’s visit at their friend,....."

Defendant?

Avol

@Coupon-mad, thanks for advice. Will change as suggested.

@1505grandad , well spotted , that’s why I need all the help I can get.

May I ask, from your experience, if this type of defence stands any real chance?