VCS Fluttering Ticket / Valid Permit - We won...

Lagroid

Couple of questions around submitting my Witness Statement. Earlier in this thread I mentioned that the county court gave a hearing date I was unavailable, and I stated this on my DQ Form. I'm still waiting for the court to reply (should be this week I hope) with a new hearing date. 

Should I hold off sending my Witness Statement through until a date closer to the date that the court fees need to be paid by the Claimant (the date specified by the court as the last day for my WS), or does that not matter?

Also, if anybody knows of any 'fluttering ticket' judgements I can reference in my Witness Statement here, that would be great: https://www.dropbox.com/s/u85yoe8qlzhucby/Witness Statement and Exhibits - redacted 29:05.pdf?dl=0

Le_Kirk

Lagroid said:

Also, if anybody knows of any 'fluttering ticket' judgements I can reference in my Witness Statement here, that would be great: https://www.dropbox.com/s/u85yoe8qlzhucby/Witness Statement and Exhibits - redacted 29:05.pdf?dl=0

Just search the forum using "fluttering ticket(s)" as your search term and change from Best Match to Newest

Lagroid

No further feedback received. Witness Statement is ready. Attaching each page below (exhibits excluded, but visible here in full: https://www.dropbox.com/s/u85yoe8qlzhucby/Witness Statement and Exhibits - redacted 29:05.pdf?dl=0) in hopes this Witness Statement for a Fluttering Ticket / Valid Permit case can help others at their Witness Statement Stage. I will update on progress of this case, as it progresses. 

Thanks again to the community for all the guidance. (Pages below include the address error of 2023. Para 9. Pointed out by 1505grandad).

Fruitcake

If it's any use, this was for an upside down ticket. The judge said it was the PPC's responsibility to make sure the tickets were fit for purpose and would not blow over.

Parking Prankster: Search results for sticky (parking-prankster.blogspot.com)

Lagroid

Fruitcake said:

If it's any use, this was for an upside down ticket. The judge said it was the PPC's responsibility to make sure the tickets were fit for purpose and would not blow over.

Parking Prankster: Search results for sticky (parking-prankster.blogspot.com)

Very helpful, will include. Great find! 

Snakes_Belly

I have not gone through your WS but I did take a look at theirs. You may be familar with this already from previous threads that the cases they cite are totally out of context.

 Beavis. I understand that you were parked in a business park not a retail park which requires a regular turnover of customers. You also had a permit so were authorised to park there. You were not disavantaging another driver.

Thornton v Shoe lane. This case defined that the contract is formed at the entrance to the car park. It assumes though that the signage is visible and that the driver is able to read the terms and conditions. Shoe Lane was a barrier car park and a driver would have to stop at the entrance to wait for the barrier to lift. This does not apply to your scenario unless it is a barrier car park. 

Vine. Excel/VCS take this case out of context and cite the first hearing. Miss Vine won on appeal.

Chaplair Ltd V Kumari. Excel and VCS cite this case to try to justify costs for debt collection. In the case costs were actually incurred.  The debt collectors that are used by most of the PPC's work on a no collection no fee basis. If you have received letters from DRP or Zenith I have a copy from their website stating that this is how they operate. 

Another point I would make. I took a look at the business park but could not work out where you were actually parked. I did not see much signage. I did notice that there was quite a lot on on road parking and if I was the judge I would ask myself that if you had not got a permit why you would not just park on the road.   

This may be useful if their rep brings up any of these cases in the hearing you will be able to argue them.

Lagroid

Snakes_Belly said:

I have not gone through your WS but I did take a look at theirs. You may be familar with this already from previous threads that the cases they cite are totally out of context.

 Beavis. I understand that you were parked in a business park not a retail park which requires a regular turnover of customers. You also had a permit so were authorised to park there. You were not disavantaging another driver.

Thornton v Shoe lane. This case defined that the contract is formed at the entrance to the car park. It assumes though that the signage is visible and that the driver is able to read the terms and conditions. Shoe Lane was a barrier car park and a driver would have to stop at the entrance to wait for the barrier to lift. This does not apply to your scenario unless it is a barrier car park. 

Vine. Excel/VCS take this case out of context and cite the first hearing. Miss Vine won on appeal.

Chaplair Ltd V Kumari. Excel and VCS cite this case to try to justify costs for debt collection. In the case costs were actually incurred.  The debt collectors that are used by most of the PPC's work on a no collection no fee basis. If you have received letters from DRP or Zenith I have a copy from their website stating that this is how they operate. 

Another point I would make. I took a look at the business park but could not work out where you were actually parked. I did not see much signage. I did notice that there was quite a lot on on road parking and if I was the judge I would ask myself that if you had not got a permit why you would not just park on the road.   

This may be useful if their rep brings up any of these cases in the hearing you will be able to argue them.

I wasn't aware of those details regarding Beavis.

Thornton v Shoe lane, not only is there no barrier, but there's no signage on entry to the car park.

Vine - I knew Miss Vine won on appeal, but it has always confused me as to why PPCs mention it, I assume just to mislead.

You're right, there's a road for parking and an overflow car park that doesn't require a permit, and it's always half empty, at most. I was parked nowhere near any alleged signs, and one of the photos I obtained from my SAR shows a wide angle shot (taken quite far back) with a sign about 6 spaces away from my car. 

Lagroid

I'm going to ask another silly question here, specifically around Witness Statements:

- Can I reference in my WS the PPCs WS? Can I pick out the paras where they mention Thornton v Shoe Lane for example and dispute it in my WS? Or does that need to wait until the day to be verbally disputed?

Sorry if that's a ridiculous question.

Coupon-mad

Yes.  But surely that's already in your defence though? I already do that in the VINE & Thornton paragraph in the Template Defence.

Lagroid

Coupon-mad said:

Yes.  But surely that's already in your defence though? I already do that in the VINE & Thornton paragraph in the Template Defence.

Yeah, all those cases are referenced in my Defence, just wasn't sure with the Claimant seeing my Defence and then disputing/misleading on those cases if it was wise for me to mention again in my WS.