Please help me with my defence

Mouse007

monkeychompy said:

But it asks for the Claimant to send their documents by 4pm 6th January 2023.

Check your email, ours arrived by email on the last day and a full printed copy by post the next day. Don't panic about the defence copied from the internet bits

Coupon-mad

It's a UKPC case, so probably DCBLegal?  Doubt they will meet the deadline.

Tell us when they discontinue!  That's the pattern.

monkeychompy

It's QDR Solicitors. I still haven't received any documentation and the deadline was 6th January. 
Ideally I want to finalise my WS well in advance of the 20th January and get it posted. So not sure how much longer to wait.

monkeychompy

What the best thing to do? Should I wait a few more days in the hope that it gets discontinued? Or try to finalise my WS ready for the 20th Jan deadline without any of their documentation?

Le_Kirk

Do not miss your deadline - assume it is going ahead and it will be a pleasant surprise if/when the discontinuation notice arrives.

monkeychompy

Well I still haven't had any documentation so I guess I have to submit my WS without seeing the Claimants documents.

Here is my fairly concise WS which I would be grateful for any opinions or advice on.

In the County Court at xxx

 

Claim Number: xxx

 

UK PARKING CONTROL LIMITED (Claimant)

 

V

 

xxx xxx xxx (Defendant)

 

WITNESS STATEMENT OF DEFENDANT FOR HEARING ON xx/xx/xxxx 

 

1. I am Mr xx xx of xx, xxxxxxx, and I am the defendant against whom this claim is made. The facts below are true to the best of my belief and my account has been prepared based upon my own knowledge. 

 

2. In my statement I shall refer to exhibits within the evidence supplied with this statement, referring to page and reference numbers where appropriate. My defence is repeated and I will say as follows: 

 

Sequence of events 

 

3. I have worked at the xx xx near the xx Leisure Centre since 2004. I have been playing football at lunchtimes at the football pitches since 2004. During that time I have seen many cars parked where I parked. I usually walk from my office to the football pitches.

 

4. On the day in question, I wasn’t working so had driven the car from home and needed to park in the xx car park. I passed a reasonably clear sign displaying Do Not Park on the double yellow lines (exhibit 01)

 

5. I parked on the opposite side of the road to the double yellow lines as close to the left hand side as possible (exhibits 02 and 03) where I had seen many people park over the years.

 

6. There is no car parking payment required for xx customers so no need to visit a ticket machine. 

 

7. I left the car and went straight to play football for an hour

 

8. When I returned, I found a PCN on my car for £100 and am now asked to pay an inflated charge of £182

 

9. At this point I noticed an additional sign that was about 7 or 8 feet from the ground with very small and unclear writing (exhibit 04)

 

10. Since the car park was a free car park, the claimant has incurred no financial loss or loss in kind. If the court accepts this, there can be no claim to interest.

 

11. The additional sums sought by the claimant for an alleged breach of contract are wholly disproportionate to the contractual sum and amount to an impermissible penalty in relation to both the PCN and, certainly, the enhanced amount (£182) which is ill defined in correspondence, varies in amount and is wholly unreceipted or costed.

 

The Beavis case is against this claim

 

12. This situation can be fully distinguished from ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC67, (exhibit 05) where the Supreme Court found that whilst the £85 was not (and was not pleaded as) a sum in the nature of damages or loss, ParkingEye had a 'legitimate interest' in enforcing the charge where motorists overstay, in order to deter motorists from occupying spaces beyond the time paid for and thus ensure further income for the landowner, by allowing other motorists to occupy the space. The Court concluded that the £85 charge was not out of proportion to the legitimate interest (in that case, based upon the facts and clear signs) and therefore the clause was not a penalty clause.

 

13. However, there is no such legitimate interest where there is no requisite fee. As such, I take the point that the parking charge in my case is a penalty, and unenforceable. This is just the sort of 'concealed pitfall or trap' and unsupported penalty that the Supreme Court had in mind when deciding what constitutes a (rare and unique case) 'justified' parking charge as opposed to an unconscionable one.

 

14. The Claimant has added a sum disingenuously described as ‘further fees and costs’ or ‘administration fees’. The added £82 constitutes double recovery and the court is invited to find the quantum claimed is false and an abuse of process. Reference is made to HHJ Jackson in Excel v Wilkinson (not appealed - see exhibit 06) where she went into detail about this abuse.

 

15. This Claimant knew or should have known, that by adding £82 in costs over and above the purpose of the 'parking charge' to the global sum claimed is unrecoverable, the Beavis case paras 98, 193 and 198 (exhibit 05) and the Excel vs Wilkinson case (exhibit 06). All of those seem to be breached in my case.

 

Lack of Landowner Authority

 

16. DVLA data is only supplied to pursue parking charges if there is an agreement flowing from the landholder (ref: KADOE rules). It is not accepted that the Claimant has adhered to a defined enforcement boundary, grace period or exemptions (whatever the landowner's definitions were) nor that this Claimant has authority from the landowner to issue charges in this specific area. The Claimant is put to strict proof of all of this, and that they have standing to make contracts with drivers and litigate in their own name, rather than merely acting as agents.

 

17. Exhibits 07 to 11 are a copy of letters sent to the Defendant showing the costs inflating over time.

 

Signage

 

18. Apart from the double yellow lines sign (exhibit 01), the signs in the car park were too high (well above head height) and the font too small. I believed I had parked legitimately and safely.

 

Statement of Truth

 

I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

 

Witness’ signature:

 

Date:

Coupon-mad

Looks good but remove 10 and 11.

10 has no chance - killed by the Beavis case

11 is repetition of what you have lower anyway.

Are you not claiming any costs?

I would add near the start that you have not received any WS or evidence at all from the Claimants, so they are in breach of the court Order dated xxxxx.

Boat_to_Bolivia

monkeychompy said:

It's QDR Solicitors. I still haven't received any documentation and the deadline was 6th January. 
Ideally I want to finalise my WS well in advance of the 20th January and get it posted. So not sure how much longer to wait.

Don't post. Email it.

monkeychompy

Coupon-mad said:

Looks good but remove 10 and 11.

10 has no chance - killed by the Beavis case

11 is repetition of what you have lower anyway.

Are you not claiming any costs?

I would add near the start that you have not received any WS or evidence at all from the Claimants, so they are in breach of the court Order dated xxxxx.

Thank you.
I don't know what costs to claim for? I have spent a huge amount of time (and worry) on this but not spent any money on it. What sort of costs have other people claimed for? 

Coupon-mad

But this is explained in aphex007's thread.  His bundle includes a costs assessment and exhibits.

I presumed you'd been directed to look at that example?  That's what you copy from.