Spring Parking & DCBL LEGAL - I won in court!!!

Coupon-mad

Of course you can now use the holes in their photos and evidence to expose the shortcomings of their case in your own WS.

Are their signage photos in date and true?

Is the landowner authority in date & correct?

Is it signed by the parking firm's own employee or by some random paralegal at the solicitors?

Pat_Burger

Coupon-mad said:

Of course you can now use the holes in their photos and evidence to expose the shortcomings of their case in your own WS.

Are their signage photos in date and true?

Is the landowner authority in date & correct?

Is it signed by the parking firm's own employee or by some random paralegal at the solicitors?

Yep, have done so!

Signage photos that are shown are a year from before PCN was issued. Photos from the day of the PCN, all text is illegible on the signs in picture.

Land owner authority - it isn't signed by the landowner. It's for a "Barsham Securities" and then the actual signatory, it is "signed for and on behalf of Barsham Securities" by XXXXX of Kemsley LLP - Is there an argument here that:

1. It's not signed for from the landowner (Which I have argued)

2. That it is not even signed for by Barsham Securities - I have not argued this yet, want to check with you all first. The signatures, the annual rental charge of XXX per sign, and the cost of administration charge of XXX per cancelled PCN on the agreement in the claimants witness pack are redacted. Is this correct? I have the non-redacted version from when I requested a SAR, which says " signed for and on behalf of Barsham Securities Limited (the Client) and the signature is signed by XXXXXXXX of Kemsley LPP.  I also have the annual charge number and cost to cancel PCNs. Can this be argued that even the car park management agreement is not signed by Barsham Securities (the client) let alone the landowner?

3. Signed by an Alan Vorhand, who we have no idea about, as his witness statement is first degree, much like Paddyposh's - https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6492058/dcb-legal-claim-form-spring-parking/p16

Coupon-mad

All worth including in your WS.

And Alan V won't turn up in court, so at the hearing you can call it out as hearsay.

Pat_Burger

Does this read ok:

1.            I have included on a non-redacted version of the Car Park Management agreement (See Exhibit 05) The agreement is not signed by the landowner, nor is it signed by Barsham securities but someone “of Kemsley LLP”. I do not know who Kemsley are and of the authority they have to sign on behalf of Barsham Securities. It is my belief that the claimant has only included a redacted version of the agreement as they wish to lure the court into believing that authority has been granted, yet an unknown party has signed the agreement. The lack of direct contractual links to either the landowner or Barsham Securities casts doubt on the claimant's standing and the validity of their claim.

 

2.            I would also like to point out that the redacted version has omitted the cost for the annual rental charge of £30 + VAT per sign to the client and also the administration charge of £10 per cancelled PCN. The claimant has failed to provide any up-to-date photos of signage at the car park in their own witness statement, only those from 2017. And have only provide 1 photo of a blurred sign that is part of the PCN which is from 2018. I am unable to take photographs of new signage at the car park due to it being a new operator here. However, I would like to propose to the court that I was unable to see additional signage other than what is mentioned in my own witness statement due to them having been removed by the claimant in order to save annual costs. There is no minimum requirement of signs within the agreement so this is an entirely feasible consideration.

I'm also aware that point 2 may sound very forward but I'm fired up while writing this!

Coupon-mad

 due to them having been removed by the claimant in order to save annual costs

That doesn't make sense because it's the landowner who pays the parking firm £30 +VAT per annum, not the other way around.

Also, didn't you try to get the landowner to cancel the PCN, before court action? If so, I'd be arguing that the Claimant was in breach of their own agreement with Barsham Securities because they were contracted to cancel PCNs on request for a tenner: a mandatory offer never extended to the Defendant either before or after court action.  You'd have to show the unredacted contract in evidence and explain it was released to you in a SAR response.

Pat_Burger

Coupon-mad said:

 due to them having been removed by the claimant in order to save annual costs

That doesn't make sense because it's the landowner who pays the parking firm £30 +VAT per annum, not the other way around.

Also, didn't you try to get the landowner to cancel the PCN, before court action? If so, I'd be arguing that the Claimant was in breach of their own agreement with Barsham Securities because they were contracted to cancel PCNs on request for a tenner: a mandatory offer never extended to the Defendant either before or after court action.  You'd have to show the unredacted contract in evidence and explain it was released to you in a SAR response.

Oh yes, I have read it wrong! Will remove that.

Yes, I emailed them in 2023 direct to Barshams asking for it to be cancelled. Never received a reply of course. Ill write a paragraph about that now

Pat_Burger

1.       Claimant breach of their own agreement: Prior to court action, I did reach out to Barsham Securities to have the PCN cancelled. I obtained a copy of the Claimant’s Cark Park Management agreement via a SAR to DCBL legal on the 9th August 2023 and received a copy of this agreement back on the 10th of August 2023. (See Exhibit 05) for copy of agreement. Having received this, I reached out to Barsham Securities to obtain a cancellation, yet received no reply. Upon reviewing the agreement, point 7 states “The claimant may make cancellation requests, but if they become excessive, i.e. more than 50% of the total number of PCN’s issued, an administration charge of £10 per cancelled PCN may be levied).

 

Unfortunately, my request was ignored and I never received a reply. As such, the claimant is in breach of their own agreement because they were contracted to cancel PCNs on request. Either for no money or £10 per cancelled PCN if more than 50% of their PCNs are cancelled. A mandatory offer of this was never made to the defendant and again further shows that the claimant is only looking for financial gain through their “fines” and vastly inflated costs.

Coupon-mad

I think that's an important point.  Put it somewhere near the top in chronological order.

Pat_Burger

Perfect, have done so now - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zPz9ICdB3vQNI3vv6E3-9h9PD0k6OpXt/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=115896370209626773673&rtpof=true&sd=true

Where can I find a general breakdown of costs? I tried to find it as I feel I saw something on a psot some where about travel costs etc. As I also have to take a day off work to attend to attend the hearing too 

Coupon-mad

Some changes:

The phrase is as I said "void for impossibility" and don't put it in bold. It's a normal phrase.

Para 10 has an unfinished sentence.

I would remove the paragraph about Mendacity because it's crossing a line you shouldn't cross in small claims.  The signatory works for Spring Parking so there's no suggestion of lies.

And every paragraph needs a number. Loads of them have no number.