Cases lost in County Court

95Rollers

Snakes_Belly said:

Judges are from different legal backgrounds but all will understand contract law. The contract is formed by the signage and if the judge deemed the signage to be adequate they are likely to decide in favour of the PPC. 

The PPC will show images of their signs to the best advantage.  

True. They will show extreme close ups coupled with an overhead map whereas in reality the signs are at ankle height and would most likely be obscured by Parked vehicles at that level and entrance signs are poorly angled and too small.  This was certainly the case in my trial with One Parking Solution regarding vantage Point carpark in Brighton. I revisited the scene and used Google Street View to show pictures of every angle both inside and on the approach to show how poor it was signed. You have put in a lot of work. Then I provided statements detailing that the sign pics they sent were from after the event and were in different positions- not as they were in the Google street pics uploaded at the same time and before my visit. The devil is in the detail. I even provided a video of the sign being read aloud which showed that it took about 10 minutes to read which was the same as their allowed grace period. 

Snakes_Belly

95Rollers said:

Snakes_Belly said:

Judges are from different legal backgrounds but all will understand contract law. The contract is formed by the signage and if the judge deemed the signage to be adequate they are likely to decide in favour of the PPC. 

The PPC will show images of their signs to the best advantage.  

True. They will show extreme close ups coupled with an overhead map whereas in reality the signs are at ankle height and would most likely be obscured by Parked vehicles at that level and entrance signs are poorly angled and too small.  This was certainly the case in my trial with One Parking Solution regarding vantage Point carpark in Brighton. I revisited the scene and used Google Street View to show pictures of every angle both inside and on the approach to show how poor it was signed. You have put in a lot of work. Then I provided statements detailing that the sign pics they sent were from after the event and were in different positions- not as they were in the Google street pics uploaded at the same time and before my visit. The devil is in the detail. I even provided a video of the sign being read aloud which showed that it took about 10 minutes to read which was the same as their allowed grace period. 

Images are persuasive. I remember Daniel's case in Nottingham. They parked in a space at the end of the row which only had one white line. It looked like a space and was not blocking any other driver. Daniel did some brilliant images. Judge said that he would have parked there. Case dismissed. 

 

Snakes_Belly

"I even provided a video of the sign being read aloud which showed that it took about 10 minutes to read which was the same as their allowed grace period." 

That is a very good idea Rollers. Excel's signs are like War and Peace.

vegansaver

Snakes_Belly said:

95Rollers said:

Snakes_Belly said:

Judges are from different legal backgrounds but all will understand contract law. The contract is formed by the signage and if the judge deemed the signage to be adequate they are likely to decide in favour of the PPC. 

The PPC will show images of their signs to the best advantage.  

True. They will show extreme close ups coupled with an overhead map whereas in reality the signs are at ankle height and would most likely be obscured by Parked vehicles at that level and entrance signs are poorly angled and too small.  This was certainly the case in my trial with One Parking Solution regarding vantage Point carpark in Brighton. I revisited the scene and used Google Street View to show pictures of every angle both inside and on the approach to show how poor it was signed. You have put in a lot of work. Then I provided statements detailing that the sign pics they sent were from after the event and were in different positions- not as they were in the Google street pics uploaded at the same time and before my visit. The devil is in the detail. I even provided a video of the sign being read aloud which showed that it took about 10 minutes to read which was the same as their allowed grace period. 

Images are persuasive. I remember Daniel's case in Nottingham. They parked in a space at the end of the row which only had one white line. It looked like a space and was not blocking any other driver. Daniel did some brilliant images. Judge said that he would have parked there. Case dismissed. 

 

Thanks for this, 

Just looked it up, for anyone else wanting to see this case you can read about it here:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/77578925#Comment_77578925

95Rollers

Snakes_Belly said:

"I even provided a video of the sign being read aloud which showed that it took about 10 minutes to read which was the same as their allowed grace period." 

That is a very good idea Rollers. Excel's signs are like War and Peace.

It's a time wasting tactic to rundown the clock on a grace periods they set. Which is why people must Always stand up to these firms.

I would advise all victims to return to the site and record videos of themselves reading all signs out aloud they read at the time. Plus video themselves walking through the site or even drive in with their plates covered up and do a Crimewatch Reenactment!!!

 This evidences they are set up to fail. Excel have taken over a carpark we used to use. I walked into it and timed myself reading one sign which took over 7 minutes. That's not taking into account the time it takes to enter, find a space, manouvere into it then exit the vehicle, read the signs then you still got to queue for the machine then hope the payment works , a sign says call them/ download an App or the sign saying "use other machines" when there is only one!!! A very simple hustle which I've exposed in local neighbourhood groups!