LLangrannog Parking impending court case

rubberdagz

Hi there, 

Have been quietly trying to follow the advice on here but now have received court papers and would very much appreciate your feedback on my defence paragraphs: 

2. It is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in question.

 

3. The defendant arrived in the car park and observed that there were initially no parking spaces available. The defendant noticed that a family appeared to be approaching their vehicle to leave and therefore the defendant waited several minutes for them to vacate the parking space and then parked up. The defendant then walked over to the pay and display machine and waited in a queue to pay. Due to the lack of phone signal, the defendant was unable to download an app to pay over the phone and therefore, stood in the queue and waited to use the ticket machine. The defendant assisted other members of the public in front of them in the queue to speed up the queue process. Once it was the defendants turn to pay, a ticket was purchased.

The defendant received an initial fee which was appealed as they believed this to be a mistake. This was rejected by the claimant as they stated that the defendant had paid for the parking session two minutes after the 15 minute grace period. The defendant was unable to pay for parking within the 15 minute time frame due to being in a queue and being unable to get a phone signal to make the payment by an alternative method, therefore the defendant believes this is a frustration of contract due to being physically prevented from being able to pay. There are well-documented examples that this car park does not provide adequate alternative means to pay for parking (including many examples that have reached the press) and that the 15 minute period is inadequate for motorists to purchase a ticket, particularly on busy days as it was in this example.

Additionally, the defendant notes that the signage used in the car park is of an extremely small font size and contains upwards of 700 words- based on an average reading speed/ability the defendant believes that the signage coupled with the grace period is inadequate to allow a decision to be made to leave the car park within the grace period.

The defendant also believes that the starting point for the grace period is unclear- the signage simply states that ‘A ten minute grace period is permitted to purchase a ticket or parking session’. The evidence that the claimant has provided reveals that the grace period has begun from point of entry to the car park not from point of parking- this is unclear from the signage, thus rendering it inadequate. The defendant did not initially park the vehicle as he was waiting for a space to become available and believes that the ambiguity of the signage does not support that any contract has been entered into.

The defendant has followed all appeal processes, including through the use of POPLA.

End of my copied text. Would very much appreciate any advice. 

Best regards

(Received claim with issue date of 1st September and completed AOS on 5th September)

Fruitcake

I suggest you add (briefly) that the contract begins "when the green button is pressed" as per Thornton vs Shoe Lane and HMRC vs NCP.

Also mention this case where the judge said that wating for a space is not parking.

Parking Prankster: Waiting for a space is not Parking. ParkingEye lose in court. Beware of snakes at Fistral Beach (parking-prankster.blogspot.com)

Quote the case number in each instance.

KeithP

rubberdagz said:

Received claim with issue date of 1st September and completed AOS on 5th September.

Hello and welcome.

With a Claim Issue Date of 1st September, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service on 5th September, you have until 4pm on Monday 3rd October 2022 to file your Defence.

That's less than two weeks away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence and it is good to see you are not leaving it to the last minute.

To create a Defence, and then file a Defence by email, look at the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Don't miss the deadline for filing a Defence.

Do not try and file a Defence via the MoneyClaimOnline website. Once an Acknowledgment of Service has been filed, the MCOL website should be treated as 'read only'.

Coupon-mad

And every paragraph needs a number. Then re-number the template below it so it's longer.

rubberdagz

Many thanks for these points- much appreciated and I will adapt and send as per the guidance.

rubberdagz

Hi again, 

Defence submitted yesterday as per guidance on newbies thread and received an automated acknowledgement- is this sufficient to know that it has been submitted, do you think? Is there any other mechanism for seeing in black and white that it has been received i.e. MCOL? If so does anyone know how long that takes? 

Many thanks again for all help, much appreciated. 

Umkomaas

received an automated acknowledgement- is this sufficient to know that it has been submitted

Or even received, it's what it's designed for. 

Is there any other mechanism for seeing in black and white that it has been received i.e. MCOL

MCOL history. 

If so does anyone know how long that takes? 

About 5 seconds once you've logged in. 

rubberdagz

Goodness, forgive my semantic indiscretions (or should that be indiscretions of semantics or indeed neither?!). I suppose I meant, how long between submitting the email to seeing it appear on MCOL? Nevertheless, it has now appeared on MCOL and I did indeed notice it after approximately 5 seconds of logging in...

In all seriousness, many thanks for your swift response and what may appear pedantic at first glance is probably very sound preparation for fixing up and looking sharp for the court case- it will be a war of words after all. Many thanks indeed. 

Umkomaas

Good, glad you're sorted on that point. 

When it comes to preparation of papers for a Judge to read (and decide on), it's imperative that everything is written so that nothing can be misread/misinterpreted/misconstrued.  

rubberdagz

Agreed- you are providing excellent training opportunities on that area of learning! 

Genuinely, thank you- your expertise is invaluable and the service that this forum provides is incredible. Very much appreciated, the karma for the regular advisors is strong! 

rubberdagz

 Received copy of claimant's DQ via email- although it was blank! Any advice on responding to that? Does it give me any advantage that they appeared to have made this error? 

Have today received court's version with the new question about determination without a hearing. Have read up on suitable response to that, so no dramas there. 

Daft question- where could one find an editable version of the newN180 form to complete electronically? I am having difficulty adding in sufficient detail to the new question where I am required to give reasons for why I am saying no to a non-hearing approach. 

Many thanks in advance