New Generation Parking Management & DCB Legal Claim Stage

Coupon-mad

If you haven't done your WS yet, use this chance to pick holes in their evidence.  Base your WS bundle on the one finalised by @aphex007 on their thread which you can click to in 2 clicks.

Obviously the WS bundle is emailed to the local court hearings email and the C's solicitors (and certainly NOT TO THE CCBC IN NORTHAMPTON).

Fruitcake

Please show us the claimant's WS. Redact personal information but leave in anything that is already in the public domain. Please tell us if the claimant has redacted anything such as names/signatures on the alleged landowner contract. 
Upload it to dropbox or similar then post the link here.

Jinef

I have yet to submit my WS bundle. Looking for assistance in looking through my own defence and their WS please!

Le_Kirk

You wrote your defence so you will have to write a witness statement (WS) that backs up and supports what you wrote (and with evidence).  Contributor @Coupon-mad has pointed you at a perfect example of a WS for style and format, the content is up to you.  If you post it here, we will critique it for you

Fruitcake

Jinef said:

I have yet to submit my WS bundle. Looking for assistance in looking through my own defence and their WS please!

If you want assistance in looking through their WS, you will need to show us their WS as I suggested earlier.

patient_dream

New Generation Management Parking Ltd using DCBL ?

WOW ...... clearly New Generation Management Parking Ltd don't read this forum >   THEY SHOULD   ...
SOMEONE TELL THEM TO CAREFULLY READ THE LINK BELOW

DCB LEGAL RECORD OF PRIVATE PARKING COURT CLAIM DISCONTINUATIONS

AS OF THE 20TH DECEMBER --------77 DISCONTINUED.

THE JOKERS OF 2022

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6377263/dcb-legal-record-of-private-parking-court-claim-discontinuations/p1

Jinef

Hi all,

Thank you for your replies, sorry for delay responding. Please find attached link to redacted case files DropBox Link.

I have a few case points I would like your advice on:

1."The Defendant admits to being the Registered Keeper, but they deny driving. My Company reasonably believes that the Defendant was the Driver because they would otherwise have nominated a driver, and therefore the Defendant is pursued on that basis. My Company has complied with POFA and can pursue the Defendant as Keeper in the alternative."

The defendant is the registered keeper but was not the keeper/driver on date. This can be evidenced. The author of this post was the driver.

2. Their own photos do not clearly indicate whether the car was within the boundary they themselves have marked on their plan. Nor do they indicate the alleged position of the vehicle within that plan. Given the obscure and poorly marked demarcation between the areas (indicated in the annotated photo) this does not seem fair.

3. The email to the landowner (the same individual who has signed the landowner agreement) raises the issue that there is clearly a conflict between the two properties adjacent to one another. In the defence it was stated the driver was instructed to park in this location and their email corroborates this likelihood. The small disclaimer sign (photographed) is the only indication of the difference between the two adjacent properties and is unlikely to have been seen. This further supports my argument that the driver followed the instructions on where to park - the driver had no reason to believe they were not authorised to park in that location and therefore did not willingly/knowingly enter into any any contract.

4. The signs are set back on away from the car park and are not illuminated. Given the multiple cars parked obscuring their presence, inclement weather conditions, the driver's true belief they were authorised to park where instructed and the driver's focus being on unloading the equipment and performing their professional role it is unreasonable to assume they would have full knowledge of the premise layout, boundaries and contractual obligations of the adjacent property.

The defendant has not submitted the the WS bundle yet. The defendant was hoping for some pointers from yourselves on what best to summarise from both their defence and any obvious weak spots in the claimant's WS given the circumstances.

Any assistance is much appreciated.

Edit: Clarity as to status of driver / registered keeper added.

Jinef

Fruitcake said:

Please tell us if the claimant has redacted anything such as names/signatures on the alleged landowner contract. 

Hi Fruitake,

On the WS submitted by the Solicitor by the claimant yes the details of the landowner were redacted.

1505grandad

"The defendant is the registered keeper but was not the keeper/driver on date."

Do you mean to deny being driver in view of :-

Para 3  -  " In my defence I have said I was instructed to park in this location and their email corroborates this likelihood."  ect.

Para4  -  "...... and inclement weather conditions and my true belief I was authorised to park where instructed ....."

Jinef

1505grandad said:

"The defendant is the registered keeper but was not the keeper/driver on date."

Do you mean to deny being driver in view of :-

Para 3  -  " In my defence I have said I was instructed to park in this location and their email corroborates this likelihood."  ect.

Para4  -  "...... and inclement weather conditions and my true belief I was authorised to park where instructed ....."

Hi 1505grandad,

Thank you for this. I have amended the original post adding clarity to the status of the driver / registered keeper. This slippage into the first person doesn't preclude the driver still being separate from the registered keeper.

The registered keeper can still deny being the driver with evidence of the actual driver. Evidence of the work order of the driver with date/time/venue and professional registration is available.